For shitz n giggles... I mean why not, nothing else to talk about... And looking at a map and population shifts, a major region for today and super long term isn't being accounted for and that's the Rockies and SW. A couple of these will be thought of as midmajors, but they'd still have a seat at the table. 8 autobids into the playoffs and 8 wildcards.
Conferences can play a 9 game round robin and have a conference championship.
Pac 10
Arizona
San Diego St
Cal
Oregon
Oregon St
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington St
Greater Rockies
Utah
Colorado
Nebraska
BYU
Nevada
Boise St
North Dakota
Wyoming
New Mexico St
Air Force
Big 8 + 2
Iowa St
Kansas
Kansas St
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Missouri
Houston
Memphis
Louisville
Tulsa
SWC
Baylor
Texas
Texas Christian
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Arkansas
LSU
New Mexico
Arizona St
Tulane
SEC
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Missippi St
ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Eastern 10
Miami
West Virginia
Maryland
Rutgers
Penn State
Notre Dame
Pitt
Syracuse
Boston College
Cincinnati
Big 10
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan St
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Iowa
Purdue
Illinois
Indiana
Minnesota
You could achieve something similar much easier with this:
ND to the ACC
Iowa St or Kansas to the Big Ten
WVU to the SEC
Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St, Baylor, and TCU to the PAC 12
Each conference would have 3 divisions of 5 (6 if you’re the PAC 18)
Each conference does its own 4 team playoff with winners advancing to a national 4-team bracket.
(01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]For shitz n giggles... I mean why not, nothing else to talk about... And looking at a map and population shifts, a major region for today and super long term isn't being accounted for and that's the Rockies and SW. A couple of these will be thought of as midmajors, but they'd still have a seat at the table. 8 autobids into the playoffs and 8 wildcards.
Conferences can play a 9 game round robin and have a conference championship.
Pac 10
Arizona
San Diego St
Cal
Oregon
Oregon St
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington St
Greater Rockies
Utah
Colorado
Nebraska
BYU
Nevada
Boise St
North Dakota
Wyoming
New Mexico St
Air Force
Big 8 + 2
Iowa St
Kansas
Kansas St
Oklahoma
Oklahoma St
Missouri
Houston
Memphis
Louisville
Tulsa
SWC
Baylor
Texas
Texas Christian
Texas A&M
Texas Tech
Arkansas
LSU
New Mexico
Arizona St
Tulane
SEC
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
Alabama
Auburn
Ole Miss
Missippi St
ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Eastern 10
Miami
West Virginia
Maryland
Rutgers
Penn State
Notre Dame
Pitt
Syracuse
Boston College
Cincinnati
Big 10
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan St
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Iowa
Purdue
Illinois
Indiana
Minnesota
I like your set up much better than the people on the non-P5 forum who want to lump Cincinnati into a conference with the likes of VCU, UAB, Western KY or whoever the eff. Your Eastern 10 looks very much like the Big East circa 2005-2012 on steroids with PSU and ND. Despite what a lot of people on here want to say it was a very good conference, lots of good television matchups and Cincinnati was very much a part of it--- in fact we won the conference 4 times in football and had the second most wins in the conference behind West Virginia from 2005-2012.
(01-26-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]You could achieve something similar much easier with this:
ND to the ACC
Iowa St or Kansas to the Big Ten
WVU to the SEC
Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St, Baylor, and TCU to the PAC 12
Each conference would have 3 divisions of 5 (6 if you’re the PAC 18)
Each conference does its own 4 team playoff with winners advancing to a national 4-team bracket.
Not really. Those B12 schools don't fit in the Pac from a cultural and traditional standpoint. Hell, Nebraska is a terrible fit for B10. When driving east to west on I80 the last 100-125 miles you're in the foothills of the Rockies. Once you get past Lincoln you the culture is more western than Midwestern.Then there's states like Nevada and New Mexico that are seeing population growth. West Virginia in the B12 is just a matter of convenience and not a great fit. But switching Mizzou and WVU would be better.
It's about the inclusion vs exclusion argument for me. The more exclusive the P5 ->P4 becomes the less eyeballs that will be on the product, as well as less inventory as a whole.
The more rivalries we destroy the less casual fans will care.
Ideally, Nebraska belongs in a Great Plains based conference—you’re trying to squeeze them into a Rocky Mountain League.
I built my plan with the idea that we have to accept the alignment moves that have already happened because we can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
I’d try to use the division structure within each league to try and bring rivals together.
A 5 team division with Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Kansas/Iowa St is a much better fit.
(01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Nine games a year against that? Giving up seven home games a year for the far smaller amount of money that schedule is going to bring in? Giving up interesting OOC series for 9 ACC games and South Carolina every year? No thanks!
(01-26-2021 03:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Nine games a year against that? Giving up seven home games a year for the far smaller amount of money that schedule is going to bring in? Giving up interesting OOC series for 9 ACC games and South Carolina every year? No thanks!
You do realize that 9 of those 10 are current ACC, 4 of which you currently play annually? There’s nothing preventing an OOC game against SC.
So what exactly is your gripe?
(01-26-2021 04:05 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 03:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Nine games a year against that? Giving up seven home games a year for the far smaller amount of money that schedule is going to bring in? Giving up interesting OOC series for 9 ACC games and South Carolina every year? No thanks!
You do realize that 9 of those 10 are current ACC, 4 of which you currently play annually? There’s nothing preventing an OOC game against SC.
So what exactly is your gripe?
That means there are five we don't play. The only interesting game we would add would be Virginia Tech, but in addition to suffering through games against NCSU and Wake we get uninteresting games with Duke, UNC, UVA, and UCF.
I listed the game against South Carolina, what will be lost are the series with UGA/LSU/OU. Not at all interested in playing more ACC teams at the cost of losing those.
(01-26-2021 03:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Ideally, Nebraska belongs in a Great Plains based conference—you’re trying to squeeze them into a Rocky Mountain League.
I built my plan with the idea that we have to accept the alignment moves that have already happened because we can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
I’d try to use the division structure within each league to try and bring rivals together.
A 5 team division with Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Kansas/Iowa St is a much better fit.
Yes. I do concur that Nebraska would belong more with Oklahoma and such in the Big 8 (+2) but I felt that the Rockies needed a blue blooded anchor. Schools like BYU and Colorado have national titles on it's resume, but they're not powers by anyone's stretch of the imagination. And schools like Utah and Boise had some solid success and could potentially be the anchors as decades pass.
With covid hitting and the loss of revenue for all makes this a perfect time to reexamine what's been lost and correct things.
(01-26-2021 03:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Nine games a year against that? Giving up seven home games a year for the far smaller amount of money that schedule is going to bring in? Giving up interesting OOC series for 9 ACC games and South Carolina every year? No thanks!
Wait, for the past 7 years you moaned how Pitt, Syracuse and BC adds nothing to the league. Either they do or they don't. I will agree that schools love that 7th home game, including Pitt. At worst the ACC would get a TV deal similar to now, but an increase per school due to 4 less mouths to feed. In the near future I see a week zero being fully implemented adding the potential of a 13 game regular season to accommodate OOC rivalries, 7 game home schedule and the push for big OOC matchups. In the real world conferences are already pushing for a 9 game conference schedule.
(01-26-2021 04:42 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 03:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]Ideally, Nebraska belongs in a Great Plains based conference—you’re trying to squeeze them into a Rocky Mountain League.
I built my plan with the idea that we have to accept the alignment moves that have already happened because we can’t put the genie back in the bottle.
I’d try to use the division structure within each league to try and bring rivals together.
A 5 team division with Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Northwestern, and Kansas/Iowa St is a much better fit.
Yes. I do concur that Nebraska would belong more with Oklahoma and such in the Big 8 (+2) but I felt that the Rockies needed a blue blooded anchor. Schools like BYU and Colorado have national titles on it's resume, but they're not powers by anyone's stretch of the imagination. And schools like Utah and Boise had some solid success and could potentially be the anchors as decades pass.
With covid hitting and the loss of revenue for all makes this a perfect time to reexamine what's been lost and correct things.
(01-26-2021 03:14 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 01:34 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]ACC
Clemson
FSU
North Carolina St
Wake Forest
Duke
Ga Tech
North Carolina
Virginia
Central Florida
Virginia Tech
Nine games a year against that? Giving up seven home games a year for the far smaller amount of money that schedule is going to bring in? Giving up interesting OOC series for 9 ACC games and South Carolina every year? No thanks!
Wait, for the past 7 years you moaned how Pitt, Syracuse and BC adds nothing to the league. Either they do or they don't. I will agree that schools love that 7th home game, including Pitt. At worst the ACC would get a TV deal similar to now, but an increase per school due to 4 less mouths to feed. In the near future I see a week zero being fully implemented adding the potential of a 13 game regular season to accommodate OOC rivalries, 7 game home schedule and the push for big OOC matchups. In the real world conferences are already pushing for a 9 game conference schedule.
Pitt has added a little to the conference. AT least they field a competitive team.
Doesn't change the fact that a ten team conference with over half of it's members in two states and the overwhelming majority of members not committed to annually playing competitive football isn't going to bring in the money that the 14 team conference is bringing in now. Taking away high profile OOC games from Clemson to play Duke/UVA/UNC/UCF isn't going to bring in the money either.
Everyone gets so hung up on geography when it comes to conferences. There has to be as much concern put into compatibility. Nine games against a slate that mostly treats football as a diversion until Midnight Madness starts isn't a good fit for a program that takes football as serious as Clemson.
If geography is so damn important why aren't you designing a conference like this:
Pitt
Penn State
Villanova
Bucknell
Duquense
Lafayette
Lehigh
Penn
Robert Morris
St Francis
Temple
Get Slippery Rock, Kutztown State, or someone to reclassify and there's your 12 team, geographically compact conference. Goods luck getting a playoff bid out of it, but geography is your biggest concern.
Hyperbole much. More than just geography lol. Sans Maryland and Cincinnati, Pitt has played each of those schools at least 60 times. Pitt has played WVU nearly 100 times if not more than 100.
(01-26-2021 05:33 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]Hyperbole much. More than just geography lol. Sans Maryland and Cincinnati, Pitt has played each of those schools at least 60 times. Pitt has played WVU nearly 100 times if not more than 100.
I know most Pitt fans disagree, but I thought the Pitt-Cincinnati series was getting heated up and was fun the last 3-4 years of the Big East. Unlike the Civil Conflict (UConn-UCF) the two schools share cities that are not to far apart that are already rivals in professional sports.
(01-26-2021 05:43 PM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 05:33 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]Hyperbole much. More than just geography lol. Sans Maryland and Cincinnati, Pitt has played each of those schools at least 60 times. Pitt has played WVU nearly 100 times if not more than 100.
I know most Pitt fans disagree, but I thought the Pitt-Cincinnati series was getting heated up and was fun the last 3-4 years of the Big East. Unlike the Civil Conflict (UConn-UCF) the two schools share cities that are not to far apart that are already rivals in professional sports.
It was definitely getting heated up. As was the series with Louisville. Fact is, the closest series in the ACC to either of those series is VaTech. Pitt is really lacking a rivalry game.
(01-26-2021 05:33 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]Hyperbole much. More than just geography lol. Sans Maryland and Cincinnati, Pitt has played each of those schools at least 60 times. Pitt has played WVU nearly 100 times if not more than 100.
Playing a bunch of games against each other does not a rivalry make.
(01-26-2021 06:25 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 05:33 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ]Hyperbole much. More than just geography lol. Sans Maryland and Cincinnati, Pitt has played each of those schools at least 60 times. Pitt has played WVU nearly 100 times if not more than 100.
Playing a bunch of games against each other does not a rivalry make.
You are correct. But ND, PSU, WVU are bonafied rivalry games for Pitt. Cincinnati was developing into a rivalry game despite playing a handful of years. Miami is a borderline rivalry game. Maryland has the potential of developing a rivalry with Pitt and is already developing a rivalry with PSU. Syracuse will never become a rivalry game. Both played 70ish times and isn't heated yet so likely never will and the same could be said of BC. ND has several rivalries in this lineup as well: BC and Miami.
How about the following playing ACC football:
North: ND/Pitt/PSU/Syracuse/BC/WVa
South: Louisville/WF/Clemson/SC/FSU/Miami
East: MD/VT/UVa/UNC/NC State/GT
The structure is 5-1 and 5-0 and rotating 2 or 3
Three division champs and a wild card play for the league title.
Duke plays basketball with this group. You play all league members once and three rivals twice.
No Duke P-5 Football - they can play FCS meaning they can keep the annual game with UNC and games with WF/NCSU/UVa and VT as they like.
Then you can have the following Big 10:
East: Rutgers, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
North: NW, Wisky, Michigan State, Minnesota, Illinois
West: Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Mizzou
Or flip Mizzou for OU and the SEC could be:
ISU, Mizzou, Texas, TT, TAMU
Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Bama, Vandy
Florida, Auburn, Georgia, TN, Kentucky
The Pacific replaces Colorado with TCU.
TCU/Utah/Arizona/ASU
Cal/USC/UCLA/Stanford
Washington/WSU/Oregon/OSU
Only Baylor and KSU are looking for a home.
Now you can have a defacto 16 team playoff using 12 divisions inside 4 conferences with 4 wild cards. That's 15 playoff games that actually mean something.
Using all the above this year would have been like so:
ND and Clemson host NC State and Miami, then winners play.
OSU and NW host Iowa/or OU and Wisconsin, then winners play.
TAMU and Bama host Florida and GA/or OU, then winners play.
Utah and Washington host USC and Oregon, then winners play.
You could seed the last 4 or do it like the Basketball tournament and arbitrarily designate regions. You would get Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, and a team from the West.
(01-26-2021 07:40 PM)Statefan Wrote: [ -> ]Then you can have the following Big 10:
East: Rutgers, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
North: NW, Wisky, Michigan State, Minnesota, Illinois
West: Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Mizzou
Or flip Mizzou for OU and the SEC could be:
ISU, Mizzou, Texas, TT, TAMU
Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Bama, Vandy
Florida, Auburn, Georgia, TN, Kentucky
The Pacific replaces Colorado with TCU.
TCU/Utah/Arizona/ASU
Cal/USC/UCLA/Stanford
Washington/WSU/Oregon/OSU
Only Baylor and KSU are looking for a home.
Now you can have a defacto 16 team playoff using 12 divisions inside 4 conferences with 4 wild cards. That's 15 playoff games that actually mean something.
Using all the above this year would have been like so:
ND and Clemson host NC State and Miami, then winners play.
OSU and NW host Iowa/or OU and Wisconsin, then winners play.
TAMU and Bama host Florida and GA/or OU, then winners play.
Utah and Washington host USC and Oregon, then winners play.
You could seed the last 4 or do it like the Basketball tournament and arbitrarily designate regions. You would get Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, and a team from the West.
Unfortunately this could be the direction things are going and it's stupid to me. What is southeastern about Iowa State? What is Pacific about TCU? I honestly lost interest in many things Pitt these past four years because the ACC doesn't make sense for Pitt. It was great at first thinking bout potential matchups with FSU and Clemson. I respect tf out of both programs and their accomplishments. But then the reality of playing both once every 6 years and once every 12 years at home took the interest away. You should play everyone in your conference every year and at home every other year. These superconferences are silly and are ultimately destroying the sport and destroying rivalries along the way. Things change, things evolve. But this is wreckless and idiotic just for the chase and high of network money. And the players just get a tiny stipend and a few dollas in their back pockets. Players need to unionize and work on getting legitimately paid.
(01-26-2021 08:45 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 07:40 PM)Statefan Wrote: [ -> ]Then you can have the following Big 10:
East: Rutgers, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
North: NW, Wisky, Michigan State, Minnesota, Illinois
West: Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Mizzou
Or flip Mizzou for OU and the SEC could be:
ISU, Mizzou, Texas, TT, TAMU
Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Bama, Vandy
Florida, Auburn, Georgia, TN, Kentucky
The Pacific replaces Colorado with TCU.
TCU/Utah/Arizona/ASU
Cal/USC/UCLA/Stanford
Washington/WSU/Oregon/OSU
Only Baylor and KSU are looking for a home.
Now you can have a defacto 16 team playoff using 12 divisions inside 4 conferences with 4 wild cards. That's 15 playoff games that actually mean something.
Using all the above this year would have been like so:
ND and Clemson host NC State and Miami, then winners play.
OSU and NW host Iowa/or OU and Wisconsin, then winners play.
TAMU and Bama host Florida and GA/or OU, then winners play.
Utah and Washington host USC and Oregon, then winners play.
You could seed the last 4 or do it like the Basketball tournament and arbitrarily designate regions. You would get Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, and a team from the West.
Unfortunately this could be the direction things are going and it's stupid to me. What is southeastern about Iowa State? What is Pacific about TCU? I honestly lost interest in many things Pitt these past four years because the ACC doesn't make sense for Pitt. It was great at first thinking bout potential matchups with FSU and Clemson. I respect tf out of both programs and their accomplishments. But then the reality of playing both once every 6 years and once every 12 years at home took the interest away. You should play everyone in your conference every year and at home every other year. These superconferences are silly and are ultimately destroying the sport and destroying rivalries along the way. Things change, things evolve. But this is wreckless and idiotic just for the chase and high of network money. And the players just get a tiny stipend and a few dollas in their back pockets. Players need to unionize and work on getting legitimately paid.
Would it help if the ACC got rid of divisions and played teams more often other than a few permanent rivals that you would play every year (in Pittsburgh's case I would assume Syracuse would be one)? I agree that once every 6 years is stupid. We don't have that in the Big Ten but we play nine game conference schedules and don't have cross divisional permanent rivals other than Purdue-Indiana.
(01-26-2021 08:51 PM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 08:45 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2021 07:40 PM)Statefan Wrote: [ -> ]Then you can have the following Big 10:
East: Rutgers, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan
North: NW, Wisky, Michigan State, Minnesota, Illinois
West: Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Colorado, Mizzou
Or flip Mizzou for OU and the SEC could be:
ISU, Mizzou, Texas, TT, TAMU
Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, MSU, Bama, Vandy
Florida, Auburn, Georgia, TN, Kentucky
The Pacific replaces Colorado with TCU.
TCU/Utah/Arizona/ASU
Cal/USC/UCLA/Stanford
Washington/WSU/Oregon/OSU
Only Baylor and KSU are looking for a home.
Now you can have a defacto 16 team playoff using 12 divisions inside 4 conferences with 4 wild cards. That's 15 playoff games that actually mean something.
Using all the above this year would have been like so:
ND and Clemson host NC State and Miami, then winners play.
OSU and NW host Iowa/or OU and Wisconsin, then winners play.
TAMU and Bama host Florida and GA/or OU, then winners play.
Utah and Washington host USC and Oregon, then winners play.
You could seed the last 4 or do it like the Basketball tournament and arbitrarily designate regions. You would get Clemson, Bama, Ohio State, and a team from the West.
Unfortunately this could be the direction things are going and it's stupid to me. What is southeastern about Iowa State? What is Pacific about TCU? I honestly lost interest in many things Pitt these past four years because the ACC doesn't make sense for Pitt. It was great at first thinking bout potential matchups with FSU and Clemson. I respect tf out of both programs and their accomplishments. But then the reality of playing both once every 6 years and once every 12 years at home took the interest away. You should play everyone in your conference every year and at home every other year. These superconferences are silly and are ultimately destroying the sport and destroying rivalries along the way. Things change, things evolve. But this is wreckless and idiotic just for the chase and high of network money. And the players just get a tiny stipend and a few dollas in their back pockets. Players need to unionize and work on getting legitimately paid.
Would it help if the ACC got rid of divisions and played teams more often other than a few permanent rivals that you would play every year (in Pittsburgh's case I would assume Syracuse would be one)? I agree that once every 6 years is stupid. We don't have that in the Big Ten but we play nine game conference schedules and don't have cross divisional permanent rivals other than Purdue-Indiana.
I think getting rid of divisions and locked into two or three schools a year would be a start. Like Pitt and Louisville was developing some heat during our time in the BE. So locked into Syracuse, Louisville and Miami would help. But ironically the schools Kap mentioned I also have zero interest in watching either. Nobody gets excited for Wake Forest or other tobacco roads schools. Nothing personal against them. There's simply nothing culturally similar between us and them. Yes, Pitt would likely be a bottom feeder in the B1G East, but at least there's some regional matchups to be excited for on a weekly basis.