CSNbbs

Thought it would be fun/interesting to create a chart showing which schools COULD be included in future expansion and which schools conferences would have no interest in.

Assumed that no school would leave B1G, SEC, or PAC.

Created multiple lists, ex.) a school in the conference's list A would trigger the conference to expand, while a school in list B would not initiate expansion but could included in the expansion if the conference wishes to expand by more than one or to an even number and no other A list are available.

List A - Primary school would initiate expansion above current membership count.
This is a school that has academics, athetics, and exposure that exceed the current membership of the conference. Conference will increase per capita revenue by their addition.
List B - Partner school if an 'A' list team agrees to join conference and no other 'A' list are available.
This is a school that has academics, athetics, and exposure that meet the current membership of the conference. Conferense will not decrease per capita revenue by their addition (ex. school may not get full share of revenue)
List C - School needed to fill a spot created by a current member leaving when a A or B school is not available.
x - not a viable candidate
y - agreement to not expand within exisiting state

B1G { A: Notre Dame, Texas, North Carolina; B: Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Kansas, Oklahoma }
SEC { A: Notre Dame, Texas, North Carolina; B: Louisville, NC State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, West Virginia, TCU }
PAC { A: Notre Dame, Texas; B: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Colorado State, San DIego State, BYU }

B1G SEC PAC ACC XII

Boston College x x x . x
Clemson x y x . C
Duke B x x . x
Georgia Tech B y x . x
Florida State x y x . C
Louisville x B x . x
Miami (FL) x . x . x
North Carolina A A x . x
NC State x B x . x
Pittsburgh x x x . x
Syracuse x x x . x
Virginia B B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Wake Forrest x x x . x
Notre Dame A A A A A

Baylor x x x x .
Iowa State x x x x .
Kansas B x x x .
Kansas State x x x x .
Oklahoma B B B x .
Oklahoma State x B B x .
Texas A A A A .
TCU x B x x .
Texas Tech x x B x .
West Virginia x B x x .

Cincinatti x x x C C
Connecticut x x x C x
East Carolina x x x x x
Houston x x x x C
Memphis x x x x C
SMU x x x x C
South Florida x x x x x
Temple x x x x x
UCF x x x x x
Tulane x x x x x
Tulsa x x x x x

Air Force x x x x x
Boise State x x x x C
Fresno State x x x x x
Colorado State x x B x x
Nevada x x x x x
UNLV x x x x x
New Mexico x x x x x
San Diego State x x B x x
San Jose State x x x x x
Utah State x x x x x
Wyoming

BYU x x B x C
Army x x x C x
Navy x x x C x

From an ACC perspective I don't think Army or Navy are really viable options at all.
However, both Temple and Tulane could possibly be considered "C" candidates for the ACC.

New Mexico and UNLV have got to be considered at least C level candidates for the PAC.

The PAC reaching in for Utah after Colorado for the SLC market could happen again with New Mexico or UNLV. The PAC agrees on Texas, Rice and Texas Tech but can't find a 16th school may grab New Mexico.

SEC/B1G/PAC may all be willing to go first strike on Oklahoma.

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The SEC would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

I'm not sure I follow the logic.

Florida State and Clemson as "C" candidates for the B12? If either school said they wanted in, the B12 would expand tomorrow.
Virginia and Georgia Tech as "B" for the B1G? The B1G has been courting them for some time. They are near the top of the B1Gs wish list.
Kansas as "B" for the B1G?
Oklahoma as a "B" for B1G, PAC and SEC?
Etc. Etc. Etc.

You obviously put a lot of time into this, but your opinion is highly subjective.

(05-21-2015 04:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ]New Mexico and UNLV have got to be considered at least C level candidates for the PAC.

The PAC reaching in for Utah after Colorado for the SLC market could happen again with New Mexico or UNLV. The PAC agrees on Texas, Rice and Texas Tech but can't find a 16th school may grab New Mexico.

SEC/B1G/PAC may all be willing to go first strike on Oklahoma.

I'd add Hawaii to the list of PAC "C" candidates. Flagship institution with decent ARWU ranking and bridge to Asian markets. I think UNM and Hawaii are both more likely than UNLV, Nevada, or BYU.

(05-21-2015 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The SEC would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

Eh, I disagree, Quo.

I think the SEC seriously needs to balance out the East, both with the number of teams and the quality of teams. So my guess would be that the SEC's "wish list" probably is much closer to:
-North Carolina/NC State
-Virginia Tech

(WVU probably would be a "C" type candidate for the SEC...)

The SEC desperately needs to find a way to shift Mizzou out to the west. It seems clear that they didn't want to miss out on Missouri but that placing Missouri in the East is a temporary measure that the SEC intends to rectify at some point. The obvious easy answer would be to internally shift a "West" team "east," but whom? The SEC isn't going to break the 'Bama-Auburn unit, Florida doesn't want LSU in the East (though that would be a more natural move), and either Mississippi or Mississippi State isn't going to rectify the top-heavy nature of the West. (And Arkansas or TAMU would be just as silly as having Mizzou out east....) So, if we're talking "expansion"/realignment, the obvious move for the SEC is to add two Eastern teams and then shift Missouri out west where they belong.

I am NOT saying that it happens this way, but that would be the most logical solution.

(Ironically, I think this scenario also theoretically opens a way for UC to at least be considered as a candidate for SEC expansion as well... Unlikely, but at least possible. If the GOR becomes prohibitive for the addition of two ACC teams, theoretically the SEC ***COULD*** add something like a NC State or VTech AND Cincinnati (relatively inexpensively...think how the B12 added TCU...). UC would bring instant rivalries with UK and Tennessee and would provide a counter for the B10Network in Ohio... And yes, before someone says it, ECU would be the other obvious add in place of UC there, but I'm a UC fan so I'll stick with UC. But it all depends how prohibitive the GoR is and how badly the SEC needs to make a move.)

(05-21-2015 07:48 PM)jrj84105 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-21-2015 04:09 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ]New Mexico and UNLV have got to be considered at least C level candidates for the PAC.

The PAC reaching in for Utah after Colorado for the SLC market could happen again with New Mexico or UNLV. The PAC agrees on Texas, Rice and Texas Tech but can't find a 16th school may grab New Mexico.

SEC/B1G/PAC may all be willing to go first strike on Oklahoma.

I'd add Hawaii to the list of PAC "C" candidates. Flagship institution with decent ARWU ranking and bridge to Asian markets. I think UNM and Hawaii are both more likely than UNLV, Nevada, or BYU.

Good Observation.

(05-21-2015 03:49 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote: [ -> ]From an ACC perspective I don't think Army or Navy are really viable options at all.
However, both Temple and Tulane could possibly be considered "C" candidates for the ACC.

Army, Navy and Air Force have all decided that a P5 schedule is deleterious to the health of their student athletes and the commandants have quietly opted not pursue such. They give up an average of 70lbs across the O and D lines. Plus the bowl and championship season is in conflict with the routine of the academies in general. All suggestions of them to a P5 are totally out of hand. Forget about it. It's not happening. Their job is to create career military officers, not NFL and NBA draftees. And quite frankly that is as it should be. I'm proud of them!

Now to answer our question:

Big 10: 1. Virginia, 2. North Carolina, 3. Virginia Tech, 4. Kansas, 5. Georgia Tech, 6. Oklahoma (Texas is up there as is Notre Dame but neither will become a reality).

SEC: 1. North Carolina, 2. Virginia Tech, 3. Texas, 4. Virginia, 5. Oklahoma, 6. Florida State, 7. N.C. State, 8. Duke

ACC: 1. Texas, 2. Penn State, 3. Tennessee, 4. Oklahoma, 5. West Virginia, 6. Connecticut

PAC: 1. Texas, 2. Oklahoma, 3. Kansas, 4. Nebraska, 5. Whoever the first 4 might insist upon.

Now for all of the scenarios thrown out there here's one that would be serious and somewhat balanced:

PAC:
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia
Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Iowa State, Kansas State, Louisville, West Virginia
Baylor, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech

(05-21-2015 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The SEC would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

I didn't realize you were a know it all. Thanks commissioner for telling us who and who doesn't want who

Nonetheless, we are in our dream conference

(05-21-2015 09:34 PM)rednblackattack Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-21-2015 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The SEC would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

I didn't realize you were a know it all. Thanks commissioner for telling us who and who doesn't want who

Nonetheless, we are in our dream conference

The huge issue facing Louisville in regards to the SEC is...Kentucky. At least as much as Florida-Florida State and Georgia-Georgia Tech, Kentucky is a HUGE issue for the SEC ever looking at adding Louisville. (And, if you're honest, I think you'll at least admit that Kentucky would seriously fight nastily to keep Louisville out of their conference. I'm not saying that UK could unilaterally block Louisville, but boy would they make it difficult.)

(05-21-2015 09:41 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-21-2015 09:34 PM)rednblackattack Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-21-2015 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The SEC would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

I didn't realize you were a know it all. Thanks commissioner for telling us who and who doesn't want who

Nonetheless, we are in our dream conference

The huge issue facing Louisville in regards to the SEC is...Kentucky. At least as much as Florida-Florida State and Georgia-Georgia Tech, Kentucky is a HUGE issue for the SEC ever looking at adding Louisville. (And, if you're honest, I think you'll at least admit that Kentucky would seriously fight nastily to keep Louisville out of their conference. I'm not saying that UK could unilaterally block Louisville, but boy would they make it difficult.)

All of your viewpoints are 20 years out of date.

(05-21-2015 06:30 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-20-2015 10:24 AM)jhasting Wrote: [ -> ]B1G SEC PAC ACC XII
Louisville x B x . x
Virginia Tech x B x . x
Oklahoma B B B x .

The Kentucky would never want Louisville under any circumstances, and would only want VT if in serious distress. In contrast, they would take Oklahoma in a heartbeat.

FIFY

Kentucky is only 1 vote

UK wouldn't want UofL in the SEC, understandably. I don't know if its accurate to say the SEC wouldn't want UofL however.

(05-22-2015 07:09 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]UK wouldn't want UofL in the SEC, understandably. I don't know if its accurate to say the SEC wouldn't want UofL however.

Curious to see how Kentucky fans will take to Calipari after His Comments that the NBA is far more important, and to get the Maximum number of players into the NBA League and Not worrying about Winning Championships and such for Kentucky. Why did Kentucky give Him a brand new $54 Million Dollar 7 year contract ? Bet that set well with SEC Reps.

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/basketbal...nal-title/

(05-22-2015 07:09 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]UK wouldn't want UofL in the SEC, understandably. I don't know if its accurate to say the SEC wouldn't want UofL however.

Kentucky and Louisville play each other every year as an in state rivalry. I would not be surprise that the ACC will take Memphis. It would give ACC another state to play an in state rivalry game with the SEC. Could boast the basketball adding them as well.

(05-22-2015 04:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-22-2015 07:09 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]UK wouldn't want UofL in the SEC, understandably. I don't know if its accurate to say the SEC wouldn't want UofL however.

Kentucky and Louisville play each other every year as an in state rivalry. I would not be surprise that the ACC will take Memphis. It would give ACC another state to play an in state rivalry game with the SEC. Could boast the basketball adding them as well.

What is scary about Memphis is they are close 3rd in ticket revenue behind UConn and Boise State with their football program wondering.

They have more power conference potential than some give them credit for.

(05-22-2015 04:17 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-22-2015 04:12 PM)DavidSt Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-22-2015 07:09 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]UK wouldn't want UofL in the SEC, understandably. I don't know if its accurate to say the SEC wouldn't want UofL however.

Kentucky and Louisville play each other every year as an in state rivalry. I would not be surprise that the ACC will take Memphis. It would give ACC another state to play an in state rivalry game with the SEC. Could boast the basketball adding them as well.

What is scary about Memphis is they are close 3rd in ticket revenue behind UConn and Boise State with their football program wondering.

They have more power conference potential than some give them credit for.

Big 12 dragged their feet on Louisville and ACC took them. Big 12 is dragging their feet again, and the ACC could snatched both Cincinnati and Memphis right from under them. U. Conn. as well. The SEC then could decide to block Big 12 by snatching East Carolina, Old Dominion and UCF. Big 12 will then have less and less likely candidates. Other conferences seem to value all these teams more than what the Big 12 give them credit for.

Quote:The SEC then could decide to block Big 12 by snatching East Carolina, Old Dominion and UCF

The Big 12 can have all 3 of those schools since none of them will ever be SEC teams.