Over two years ago when the second coming of the 4 x 16 super-conference theory finally hit the mainstream over 30 years after its conception the first full fledged conceptualization of it had the Big 12 being absorbed by the remaining conferences. Why? It was the one bordered by the Big 10, SEC, and PAC.
Back then the debate centered around the division of the conference. Colorado had just bolted for the PAC, Texahoma rumors were flying, and Nebraska had just departed for Delanyland.
Speculation for the ACC was wild but many Speculators saw the eventual offers going to Connecticut and Cincinnati. They did better, much better. Notre Dame when on board full time would be #15.
When the SEC claimed Texas A&M and Missouri the death of the Big 12 looked like a certainty. It just didn't happen. Why? Nobody including the key members of the Big 12 could agree on where anybody would go. Then with the successes of recent grabs greedy eyes fell upon the ACC and with the departure of Maryland suddenly the bits and pieces of the Big 12 didn't look as appetizing as the juicier parts of the ACC. In comes GOR part 2. Suddenly people were saying realignment was dead. And maybe it is?
One of my first theories on this was that the SEC would move to 16 with either an Oklahoma school and Baylor, or an Oklahoma school and a Kansas school. Since the Big 10 only took AAU programs I felt that the likely pair for them would be Iowa State and Kansas. That idea drew boos and cat calls from the Big 10 crowd, but still if the Big 12 was subdivided who else would they take if they couldn't get Texas?
Hot on the rumors of Texahoma 1 and then Texahoma 2 I felt reasonably sure that Texas at the time might head West. Then came the LHN and suddenly all first blush theories seemed to be out the window.
XLance proposes that the ACC will go to 16 with Notre Dame coming fully on board and Vanderbilt agreeing to move over from the SEC. He feels that the SEC would move to 16 with Baylor, an Oklahoma school, and West Virginia. He further feels that Texas and Texas Tech with two others will move to the PAC. Now given that scenario it comes very closely back to the original speculation (other than the Vanderbilt part).
In the Big 12 / SEC thread I quipped that since that would not really satisfy anyone it might be one way to resolve the dilemma. But let's look at it from another perspective. Relative value. It won't make you happy but it might make some sense when you assume that networks are looking to find some balance between conferences.
Texas to the PAC: Adds to the bottom line of the PAC network and gains ESPN a share of that (per XLance) pie. ESPN gains a percentage of the West coast market. The PAC gets help in distribution and the Texas market profits both the PAC and ESPN. Texas Tech another Texas public finds a P4 permanent home and they form the bridge to Austin. Iowa State heads to the PAC to partner up with Iowa in the PAC/Big 10 partnership which will reemerge. Kansas State moves to the PAC for the same reason as Kansas will be headed to the Big 10. FOX owns Oklahoma's T3 rights. The Sooners head to the Big 10 with Kansas to bolster a sagging football profile, maybe? This is a big risk for Oklahoma. If little brother gets to stay and play locally against Arkansas, Texas A&M, Baylor, Missouri, L.S.U. and enjoys the tag of SEC then maybe Oklahoma cuts its recruiting ties to Texas too much even though the RRR becomes a PAC/Big 10 deal and maybe they die the slow painful twisting death that Nebraska finds itself in now.
The SEC picks up Baylor, Oklahoma State/Oklahoma, and West Virginia. These are three non threatening meh moves. All three are either presently or historically decent but not dominant football programs. Baylor helps the academics but the other two don't. What do they do for the SEC? Baylor and Oklahoma State together give the SEC a good enough portion of the DFW market that along with A&M gives the SEC all of East Texas and North Texas as solid markets and carry enough of the rest of the state to count. Oklahoma State does deliver Oklahoma. If the Sooners opt for the Big 10 then the Cowboys and T.Boone stand to pull an Aggie and become a much more dominant player in their home state. If Oklahoma opts for the SEC then Iowa State would likely go to the Big 10 with Kansas and Oklahoma State would be headed to the PAC. This would create a new titanic struggle between A&M and Boomer and Oklahoma State would head into obscurity. West Virginia will need a lot of improvement academically otherwise they tank the academic average of the SEC, especially if Vanderbilt heads to the ACC. The Mountaineers do deliver a passionate if not somewhat destructive fan base. But they give the SEC a presence in Pittsburgh, all of West Virginia, a slither of Southeast Ohio, and part of the D.C. market.
If this transpires nobody is going to be totally happy and nobody is going to be totally bereft of value. Personally looking at it from a network perspective I think the Sooners go Big 10 if this scenario unfolds. I think that only because Boren has not yet stepped down and FOX has their T3.
Assessment: Florida, Texas A&M and Missouri will all be pissed if Vanderbilt leaves for the ACC.
Assessment: CIC proponents will be pissed if Oklahoma becomes a bigger bug in their punch bowl than Nebraska.
Assessment: Clemson and Florida State might be happier with N.D. on in full, but will be pissed at the addition of another Wake Forest / Duke asset to play in Vanderbilt.
Assessment: Stanford and California will be pissed over the academics of Kansas State and Texas Tech. They will be somewhat satisfied with Iowa State and totally satisfied with Texas because the Horns add profit.
Nobody is totally happy.
Predictions, This move will only make the following schools happy in the long run:
Kansas will be happy because they will be where they fit best.
West Virginia will be happy because it is what they wanted anyway.
Baylor will be happy because they keep a 100 year old rivalry and their fans don't have to travel West.
Oklahoma State would be happy because in the SEC they become more than an afterthought.
Iowa State will be happy because they are in.
Kansas State will be happy for the same reason.
The Big Losers will be:
Texas cut off from their former power base suffers the fate of moving West and diminishing.
Oklahoma initially has a giddy academic click but their alumni will grow morose over their slow and steady decline as they are become less of a factor in recruiting Texas and California.
Mike Slive might make a shrewd business move with this, but those three names will not appease the masses of SEC fans who want another helmet school. And even though it might be the most profitable option on the table for the SEC it will never be popular outside of Tuscaloosa which will simply count 3 more potential wins.
T.C.U. because they are out.
Vanderbilt because they will no longer be the top academic school in their conference.
Notre Dame because they lose their independence.
*****************************************************************************************************************
This will help you visualize the theory:
Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Now how could this work? Let's assume that eventually these 4 conferences choose only to play one another. Their Spring games are turned into a preseason game against a local lower level FBS or FCS school and serves as their 7th home game. Each conference plays 9 conference games and 3 against the other conferences.
Texas could play A&M from the SEC, Notre Dame from the ACC, and Oklahoma from the Big 10.
Oklahoma could play Texas from the PAC, Oklahoma State from the SEC, and Florida State from the ACC.
Iowa State plays Iowa from the Big 10, Missouri from the SEC, and another Big 10 school.
Auburn plays Georgia Tech from the ACC who can also play Georgia from the SEC and an old rivalry is renewed.
This kind of scheduling can help to renew lost rivalries and help to keep even OOC games regional. It removes dud tickets for season book holders. It provides higher content for the networks. And with 4 champions as the model for the playoff there is no need to sandbag your schedule anyway.
Very interesting theory. I think that your overall list of winners and losers, as well as the assessment summaries are well considered.
I can see a lot of resistance from ND on finally making a full commitment and giving up independence. I think that may be the biggest single hurdle to the whole notion. Even if the others gang up to somehow exclude them structurally from a championship as an independent, I could see them stubbornly doing so, since independence is part of their DNA. I think that lower level FBS schools would hate it, but I don't know if they'd have the power to stop it.
On a big-picture P5 level, there's a lot to like about this. Setting up those games against the other 3 conferences does add good content back to schedules, and as much as people may root for their conferences, they're going to root for their own school first, and they're going to want to see good games. A scenario like you lay out with Oklahoma playing both Texas and FSU regularly to supplement their B1G slate would help keep them in a good recruiting position, and resuming the OU/NU rivalry can re-energize the Huskers as well. Having the 4 regional champions come together for the championship playoff would also keep the broad national interest alive as well through the season and into the playoff, which the networks would love.
(05-16-2014 11:19 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote: [ -> ]Very interesting theory. I think that your overall list of winners and losers, as well as the assessment summaries are well considered.
I can see a lot of resistance from ND on finally making a full commitment and giving up independence. I think that may be the biggest single hurdle to the whole notion. Even if the others gang up to somehow exclude them structurally from a championship as an independent, I could see them stubbornly doing so, since independence is part of their DNA. I think that lower level FBS schools would hate it, but I don't know if they'd have the power to stop it.
On a big-picture P5 level, there's a lot to like about this. Setting up those games against the other 3 conferences does add good content back to schedules, and as much as people may root for their conferences, they're going to root for their own school first, and they're going to want to see good games. A scenario like you lay out with Oklahoma playing both Texas and FSU regularly to supplement their B1G slate would help keep them in a good recruiting position, and resuming the OU/NU rivalry can re-energize the Huskers as well. Having the 4 regional champions come together for the championship playoff would also keep the broad national interest alive as well through the season and into the playoff, which the networks would love.
Phog, I'm not sure long term how Texas and Oklahoma would like it, but when you can't find a solution that pleases everyone sometimes it is better to find one that pleases no one but is fairly equitable. I think that is the advantage to this theory. The SEC lands more of 1 market along with two others while losing no markets and gaining ancillary entry into a few adjoining West Virginia. It doesn't land a helmet program and that can be good as well since the powers that stabilize the conference don't feel threatened, including A&M. 10th wouldn't be happy about Baylor, but it's not U.T. or T.T.U. or O.U. which puts the Aggies in position to dominate their state. But it does add to the middle. It gives the ACC another flagship football program and the PAC gets one as well. The Big 10 gets 1 big hoops and 1 big football program. And the only one out is one whose entry into the P5 was widely debated.
Thanks for doing all of the dirty work JR.
Phog, The story out this week about Notre Dame cancelling the series with Michigan State is telling. Michigan State played Notre Dame before they were a B1G member. They were the only mid-western school that would play ND. There is a lot of loyalty there on Notre Dame's part (see Navy). To end that series after a long term compromise had been worked out (4 years on, 2 years off IIRC) has to tell you that something is about to change.
Maryland, a charter member of the ACC leaves for the B1G because over time the school changed and no longer fit the profile of an ACC school. The conference and UM simply grew apart. I see great similarity with Vanderbilt and the SEC. Their emphasis has simply not kept up with the rest of the SEC and they now find themselves in a position that their strongest tie is tradition and little else. Vanderbilt still operates without and athletic director don't they?
Why would these schools choose to only play each other? Inventory for their broadcast partners.
BTW JR, I see the ACC diveded this way:
Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College
Dook, UVa, Carolina, Georgia Tech
Florida State, Clemson, Wake Forest, NC State
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Miami, Virginia Tech
You do realize that Dook and Ga. Tech have played every year since 1933, right?
Florida State may want Ga. Tech in their division, but it is kind of like unrequited love.....
(05-16-2014 12:14 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for doing all of the dirty work JR.
Phog, The story out this week about Notre Dame cancelling the series with Michigan State is telling. Michigan State played Notre Dame before they were a B1G member. They were the only mid-western school that would play ND. There is a lot of loyalty there on Notre Dame's part (see Navy). To end that series after a long term compromise had been worked out (4 years on, 2 years off IIRC) has to tell you that something is about to change.
Maryland, a charter member of the ACC leaves for the B1G because over time the school changed and no longer fit the profile of an ACC school. The conference and UM simply grew apart. I see great similarity with Vanderbilt and the SEC. Their emphasis has simply not kept up with the rest of the SEC and they now find themselves in a position that their strongest tie is tradition and little else. Vanderbilt still operates without and athletic director don't they?
Why would these schools choose to only play each other? Inventory for their broadcast partners.
BTW JR, I see the ACC diveded this way:
Notre Dame, Syracuse, Pitt, Boston College
Dook, UVa, Carolina, Georgia Tech
Florida State, Clemson, Wake Forest, NC State
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Miami, Virginia Tech
You do realize that Dook and Ga. Tech have played every year since 1933, right?
Florida State may want Ga. Tech in their division, but it is kind of like unrequited love.....
Well it is a loss most years for Georgia Tech. And yes I realized the duration of their play. Georgia Tech first played Auburn in 1892 and played every year after that until 1978 with a couple of the WWII years excepted. If we go to 4 pods there are numerous ways to work them. Probably the favorite method is the 3 dedicated games with a 1 school rotation each year for the other 3 pod members. That way it wouldn't matter if GT and Duke weren't in the same pod or whether all 4 Carolina schools were. As along as GT can designate 1 school from each of the other pods to play annually you still rotate through the entire conference every 3 years. What you give up is home and home with the teams cycled through. That way when you have completed a cycle the home game is reciprocated with a road game the next time through and vice versa. That's why it is not necessary for Tennessee and Alabama to be together and why it is not necessary for Auburn and Alabama to be together as long as Auburn and Tennessee are not in the same pod then neither of them have to be in the pod with Alabama. Or you put all of the rivals in the pod and rotate everyone else. I like the first method personally but either one works and both have advantages.
BTW XLance the schools also would choose to play only each other because no TV money escapes the Upper Tier that way. If a preseason game is implemented then those playing SEC/ACC schools would do so for simply a check. All TV revenue stays in house. So it not only bumps up content value but it keeps all perks in house. What most of the public is hating now, would be restored with added benefits. Pitt/West Virginia is restored as yet another end of season ACC/SEC games. Tennessee/Vanderbilt could become one if they so choose, Kansas/Missouri becomes a Big 10/SEC contest like Oklahoma/Oklahoma State and perhaps Kentucky/Indiana. There is a lot of upside. The talk has been there all along. Dabo talking about changing the Spring game to a real opponent for instance. And you have Saban talking about only playing P5 schools. All of the 4 x 16 stuff for several years was a kind of desensitizing to eventual movement. Even Texahoma in this case would have been a premature effort to get there. It's something to think about anyway.
(05-16-2014 11:38 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 11:19 AM)BewareThePhog Wrote: [ -> ]Very interesting theory. I think that your overall list of winners and losers, as well as the assessment summaries are well considered.
I can see a lot of resistance from ND on finally making a full commitment and giving up independence. I think that may be the biggest single hurdle to the whole notion. Even if the others gang up to somehow exclude them structurally from a championship as an independent, I could see them stubbornly doing so, since independence is part of their DNA. I think that lower level FBS schools would hate it, but I don't know if they'd have the power to stop it.
On a big-picture P5 level, there's a lot to like about this. Setting up those games against the other 3 conferences does add good content back to schedules, and as much as people may root for their conferences, they're going to root for their own school first, and they're going to want to see good games. A scenario like you lay out with Oklahoma playing both Texas and FSU regularly to supplement their B1G slate would help keep them in a good recruiting position, and resuming the OU/NU rivalry can re-energize the Huskers as well. Having the 4 regional champions come together for the championship playoff would also keep the broad national interest alive as well through the season and into the playoff, which the networks would love.
Phog, I'm not sure long term how Texas and Oklahoma would like it, but when you can't find a solution that pleases everyone sometimes it is better to find one that pleases no one but is fairly equitable. I think that is the advantage to this theory. The SEC lands more of 1 market along with two others while losing no markets and gaining ancillary entry into a few adjoining West Virginia. It doesn't land a helmet program and that can be good as well since the powers that stabilize the conference don't feel threatened, including A&M. 10th wouldn't be happy about Baylor, but it's not U.T. or T.T.U. or O.U. which puts the Aggies in position to dominate their state. But it does add to the middle. It gives the ACC another flagship football program and the PAC gets one as well. The Big 10 gets 1 big hoops and 1 big football program. And the only one out is one whose entry into the P5 was widely debated.
From a geographic perspective, in this scenario the travel requirements for OU and UT would go up, which would increase costs. I do think that having this hammered out to increase desirable inventory would likely also increase revenues to help offset that increased cost. While they don't have quite the luster they used to have, there are still a significant number of "helmet" programs in the B1G, so there would be some attractive opponents on OU's slate. As for fan travel to games at opponents' sites, there's been a lot of talk on here about how many fans are turning down home games (which include their teams' own traditions and such) in favor of staying at home in front of the big screen, so while it may inconvenience some fans, I think that's likely to be a shrinking minority in any case. UT's road trips would now have some attractive California destinations. They'd still have a lot of home games on their slate as well as 3 Central Time zone opponents in their division, so late games would only take up a part of their schedule.
Overall, it's a pretty fair distribution as you note - everybody gets something, and everyone has something about it that they wouldn't like. As for aTm and the Baylor question, if their administration and fanbase truly buys into the "conference-first" perspective, they'd likely hold their nose and accept Baylor if that's what it'd take to get this all done. After all, in the end they won - they're in the conference they want to be in, and Ken Starr is almost 70 already and will soon be nothing more than a footnote in history. There would be nothing to gain from holding a grudge aside from emotional satisfaction.
One element I really like about this scenario is the idea of teams playing a game against each of the other conferences. Everyone but the "Central" division of the PAC would be in a tight geographic fit within the bulk of their conference, and playing a few games against teams from other regions creates interesting matchups, and it would also give an interesting "top-to-bottom" comparison among conferences with a balanced (in terms of games played) schedule. The championship would create the ultimate in bragging rights, although the regular season "series" among conferences would also be a fun thing to follow from a fan perspective. There may well be some imbalances where traditionally stronger teams are matched against traditionally weaker teams to satisfy old rivalry requirements and the like, but those differences would probably somewhat average out.
You could also potentially have a similar interconference scheduling arrangement for basketball, with different opponents from the football slate to create yet more interconference rivalries.
(05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
(05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
(05-16-2014 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
If by chance Vandy is the cost for Notre Dame going all in then it's a bit more understandable. But if Vandy is leaving for cultural reasons then we should be getting Florida State, Clemson, or Virginia Tech for cultural reasons in my opinion.
(05-16-2014 03:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
If by chance Vandy is the cost for Notre Dame going all in then it's a bit more understandable. But if Vandy is leaving for cultural reasons then we should be getting Florida State, Clemson, or Virginia Tech for cultural reasons in my opinion.
Don't get greedy.
Everybody is going to be better that they are now, nobody is going to hit a home run, but everybody hits. As a college football fan, don't we all want the game to be the winner?
(05-16-2014 04:48 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
If by chance Vandy is the cost for Notre Dame going all in then it's a bit more understandable. But if Vandy is leaving for cultural reasons then we should be getting Florida State, Clemson, or Virginia Tech for cultural reasons in my opinion.
Don't get greedy.
Everybody is going to be better that they are now, nobody is going to hit a home run, but everybody hits. As a college football fan, don't we all want the game to be the winner?
That's fair. But there is a danger in the SEC losing Vanderbilt. That danger would be overcome with a cooperative effort by the AAU members of the ACC and SEC forming an association for themselves. Florida is going to be truly upset if this happens. The SEC can't afford to lose Vanderbilt and have that strain relations with Florida too and I think you realize that already. Those issues could be swept aside with an organization like the one of which I spoke. We took A&M and Missouri to build such an alliance and to assist Vanderbilt and Florida. If we take the three proposed we are taking a major step backwards and that will not be well received. Form an alliance on that issue and the move is not a factor.
I dont think there will be any peaceful partition of the Big 12. I think UT is going to get tired of the league and its "New Big East" status and as soon as the GOR comes up (or close to it) just leave with a few friends and leave the rest to die as they intended to do in 2010.
I think that UT and OU will work it out to go West to the PAC with TTU and OSU. It satisfies TX politics keeps some locals on the schedule and for OU it keeps OSU out of the SEC. UT will have to surrender LHN to PACN but thats the price of getting out of a conference that is killing their attendance and fan base with lack of interest. And to them, the PAC is still winnable. Remember, these two have always made their bones dominating lesser conferences and want no part of any conference like the SEC where they are not near guaranteed to win 8-9 games a year. They know that their fans want wins and chances at titles far more than they want good games they could lose.
I think the B1G responds by bringing in Kansas and UConn
The SEC brings in West Virginia and Florida State
The ACC brings in UCF, USF and Cincinnati
The Big 12 leftovers (BU/TCU/ISU/KSU) invite in UH/SMU/Mempis/UNM/BSU/UNLV/SDSU/CSU/AFA/FStU to the new Big 14
Its not glamorous but its how the P4 are born and the playoff essentially becomes defacto each of their champs.
(05-16-2014 04:48 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 07:55 AM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ]Big 10:
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma
Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Louisville, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
SEC:
Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi State
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Texas A&M
Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma State
PAC:
Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech
Arizona, Arizona State, Cal Los Angeles, Southern Cal
California, Colorado, Stanford, Utah
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
If by chance Vandy is the cost for Notre Dame going all in then it's a bit more understandable. But if Vandy is leaving for cultural reasons then we should be getting Florida State, Clemson, or Virginia Tech for cultural reasons in my opinion.
Don't get greedy.
Everybody is going to be better that they are now, nobody is going to hit a home run, but everybody hits. As a college football fan, don't we all want the game to be the winner?
No. Why? ND doesn't "hit" in your rumor, it is shot in the face by a hit man.
This would be of no benefit at all to ND. It would be a huge disaster.
I am not a fan of "the game". I am an ND fan.
ND is not going to be better than it is now by joining the ACC, your idea would erode the very fabric/idea of ND football.
I think your rumor is without substance. What tangible benefit would this be to ND (that it doesn't have now) to make it want to agree to blow up its identity?
I've done some checking around. I have found 1 possible substantiation but it is a significant one, but it has nothing to do with realignment or with N.D. joining in full. The SEC and ACC had a joint meeting with ESPN last week and part of the discussion supposedly centered around packaging the two networks together for the purpose of combining the footprints for sales. Now that kind of move preempts the need for one conference to raid the other for market reasons. Also discussed at this meeting was the good that could come from more scheduling agreements for all sports between the two conferences.
If the SEC Network meets with the kind of success that is expected then by 2017 an ACCN would be forthcoming and their programming bundled. Such a move negates the need for the SEC to part with Vanderbilt since the ACC gets the benefit of the Nashville market and the expanse between Nashville, Louisville, and South Bend.
So I don't think Vanderbilt is going anywhere. What I do think is that ESPN could go for 4 Big 12 schools to finish out the SEC and ACC and that since the ACC needs more build up the transfer of N.C. State and Virginia Tech to create space for a 4 team pod from the Big 12 "might" be an option should Texas and Oklahoma, Kansas, and another like Baylor need an ESPN conference home.
I don't see ESPN and FOX particularly working together to get us to 4x16.
Could they? Sure, but conflict over properties would be sure to arise since so few that move the needle are left.
I'm not saying that the scenario here could not happen, or that it would not work. Both are plausible to a degree and even that would depend upon circumstance.
But as far as the thread on the other board about the ACCN, I feel fairly sure that win win for both conferences is on the way in that regard.
I think this theory depends too much upon Texas going along with the program. I don't think this would be their ideal scenario and they have the power to blow it up.
(05-16-2014 10:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]I think this theory depends too much upon Texas going along with the program. I don't think this would be their ideal scenario and they have the power to blow it up.
If Texas does not got to the PAC, then we won't end up with 4 X 16.
I'm sure the Horns will take full advantage of the situation.
Texas isn't going anywhere.
(05-16-2014 08:39 PM)TerryD Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 04:48 PM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:50 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 03:47 PM)JRsec Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 02:22 PM)vandiver49 Wrote: [ -> ]Ahh..implementation of the classic definition of compromise, I like it. And in the main its not that terrible since most of the 'loss' is based on academic perception. And as you've stated, the pods are small enough to provide the scheduling flexibility to renew old rivalries and pursue new ones.
The only questions I have are;
- Since the SEC would actually force the 'Dores to leave, how much money would you have to give Vandy individually to make this move?
- Would you have another conference below this that collects the top G5 schools and pays them between 30-40% of a P4 conference and grant access to the CFP?
Well Vandiver I wouldn't force Vanderbilt to leave. I would just take an Oklahoma school and Baylor and let the ACC worry about WVU. But if Vanderbilt leaves it would be by their choice only so there would be nothing to add. I do think they would be a lot more competitive in the ACC, but then again they could drop down to their new level of competition too.
In this setup there is no trap conference to collect the best of the G5 and that is a weakness. I like the 3 conference setup I have over in the other thread better, but for simplicity and compromise this one has some good points too. The conference made it clear years ago if you want to leave don't let the door hit you in the butt on the way out. If you are in nobody is going to ask you to leave. That policy is still in effect.
Of course this whole scenario could play out another couple of ways too. For instance if ESPN can't get the PAC to give concessions in order to land Texas then Texas could join the ACC with Notre Dame to get to 16.
Oklahoma may not choose to go to the Big 10 so they could take the Cowboys place in the SEC and Iowa State or Connecticut would have to go with Kansas to the Big 10. And the PAC would have to take the leftovers. But then that is why XLance's theory is as good as any because if the PAC wants to stay together they will make those concessions to get the only school that really helps them, Texas. The question then becomes does Oklahoma fear their fate in the Big 10? Do they want to face what Nebraska is facing in recruiting woes while like A&M little brother OSU starts coming on back home? If they opt for the SEC then OSU goes to the PAC and I think Iowa State moves to the Big 10. However once you start getting a favorable imbalance to one conference or another everyone quits cooperating and you are back to square 1. I think this scenario is about as good as you get on a compromise. So we either have the SEC and Big 10 go Mega and shoot for 20 or 24 and the elimination of the Big 12, ACC and PAC as we know it, or we get something like this. With the weariness of all things unstable out there I can see such a compromise coming to fruition. Although I don't necessarily see the need for the SEC to give up Vandy unless they truly want to go.
If by chance Vandy is the cost for Notre Dame going all in then it's a bit more understandable. But if Vandy is leaving for cultural reasons then we should be getting Florida State, Clemson, or Virginia Tech for cultural reasons in my opinion.
Don't get greedy.
Everybody is going to be better that they are now, nobody is going to hit a home run, but everybody hits. As a college football fan, don't we all want the game to be the winner?
No. Why? ND doesn't "hit" in your rumor, it is shot in the face by a hit man.
This would be of no benefit at all to ND. It would be a huge disaster.
I am not a fan of "the game". I am an ND fan.
ND is not going to be better than it is now by joining the ACC, your idea would erode the very fabric/idea of ND football.
I think your rumor is without substance. What tangible benefit would this be to ND (that it doesn't have now) to make it want to agree to blow up its identity?
TerryD, I appreciate your relentless efforts to defend Notre Dame's independence at all costs. You are a true believer.
But........some of the most ardent Notre Dame alumni (including the one I have been playing golf with every week for the last 18 years ((ND-Baseball)) are now saying conference membership for the Irish will happen.
I don't know for sure, but it appears from my friend's viewpoint that it will.
I can't speak to the fact that the very fabric/idea of ND football would be eroded or not, but things do change.
(05-17-2014 11:48 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 10:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]I think this theory depends too much upon Texas going along with the program. I don't think this would be their ideal scenario and they have the power to blow it up.
If Texas does not got to the PAC, then we won't end up with 4 X 16.
I'm sure the Horns will take full advantage of the situation.
I think my scenario is just as viable and it doesn't require Texas going West. This is a good scenario, yours. I just think there is one kink in it and unfortunately that kink involves Texas which means it is a very big kink.
On paper though it looks very solid and would make everyone else happy.
(05-17-2014 10:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ] (05-17-2014 11:48 AM)XLance Wrote: [ -> ] (05-16-2014 10:49 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]I think this theory depends too much upon Texas going along with the program. I don't think this would be their ideal scenario and they have the power to blow it up.
If Texas does not got to the PAC, then we won't end up with 4 X 16.
I'm sure the Horns will take full advantage of the situation.
I think my scenario is just as viable and it doesn't require Texas going West. This is a good scenario, yours. I just think there is one kink in it and unfortunately that kink involves Texas which means it is a very big kink.
On paper though it looks very solid and would make everyone else happy.
Well He1nous what are you thinking will happen?