(03-09-2014 12:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think 24 works too. You play the 5 other schools in your pod and 1 school in each of the other 3 pods for 8 conference games. If you do a rivalry game there is 9. Play the schools in the other pods every 6 years. Not ideal, but workable. In the 14 team SEC don't some of the schools only play like once every seven years? Not much different.

Or just say screw it and set it up like 2 different conferences of 12-16 schools. Schools from each side only play each other in the conference playoff or out of conference. This is something the B12 and ACC could do.

With 24 it becomes too difficult to accommodate rivals that are located beyond your geographical division and it leaves no room for intersectional games which television loves.

As for the Big 12 and ACC getting together I would simply say that you can't join two cracked foundations and build safely upon it. The best solution is to add the strongest and best suited pieces from each to the SEC and Big 10 and then rebuild a new conference of relative peers out of the remnants. The Big 12 is too disparate in membership as too is the ACC.

Big 12 strata:
1. Texas, Oklahoma...............Kansas
2. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech...............W.V.U.
3. Baylor, ...........T.C.U.

ACC strata:
1. North Carolina, Virginia, Duke................Syracuse
2. Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh........Miami.....N.C. State
3. Boston College,.............Louisville................Wake Forest

1. Notre Dame in a class above the rest but not part of them.

Level 1 is a national brand that is the top school in their state. The only exception here is Duke.

Level 2 is an extremely strong program to moderate program but one that is not the top school in their state.

Level 3 is a good school but filler and probably private.

There are 7 national brands between the two. There are 11 strong to medium brands that are not #1 in their state. West Virginia is only ranked with these due to academics.

Level 3's will have a hard time finding a new home. Boston College because of markets and hockey has the best chance and then probably only in the Big 10.

The distance, the types of schools, the variance in their academic pursuits, and their sports emphasis all work against building something that would last out of the two conferences. It would be like two people with complimenting personality disorders saying, "I think together we can have a good marriage." It always sounds logical, but the results are seldom satisfactory.

The SEC is clearly a football first conference which is highly competitive and largely comprised of large state schools (large for the South) of which again the majority are the state flagship school of their state.

The Big 10 is clearly an academics first conference that plays great basketball, but wants to be a football first conference. The are comprised of large state schools with sound academic standing.

In both the SEC and Big 10 everyone is clear as to their priorities. In both the SEC and Big 10 profits are share and share alike. The SECN finally swept away the disparity of third tier deals in the SEC.

While the ACC has moved to share and share alike they remain 3 separate entities bound in once conference with two outliers. Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse are similar but they are decidedly big city Northern cultures. Virginia, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest are decidedly wealthy suburban schools with Southern heritage. While N.C. State and Virginia Tech are part of this grouping they are distinct in that both are more middle class and prefer football somewhat.

Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech are very different from the others. They are football first schools. But even these are very different than one another. Miami is more Northern in culture and has more in common with Syracuse, Pitt, and B.C. than any of the others. Georgia Tech is simply a stellar math and science school with Southern roots. Clemson and Florida State are the most similar.

There are three mindsets in the ACC. It is a house divided. Louisville is an outlier as is Miami. But Louisville in much farther inland and with a much different academic background.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas form the entitled culture of the Big 12. Kansas being the more mainline of those three. Oklahoma is basically in line with the SEC in most demographics but they fancy themselves as being better. Kansas is better than all but about 5 or 6 SEC schools when it comes to academics. They are a better fit for the Big 10.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech are all solid agricultural schools.

West Virginia is a total outlier but is the flagship school of its state with a mission to bring up the educational level of the rural parts of West Virginia. Much like Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State they are bound by their state legislature to make concessions on research and entrance requirements to accomplish their task of helping education statewide. This serves to handicap them in academic ranking.

Baylor is a strong private that should find a home but with 3 good state schools already in Texas it will be hard.

T.C.U. lacks the athletic diversity to truly compete at the P5 level and sustain success.

That's too much dissimilarity to build successfully upon. But between them there are enough schools in the middle range to reconstruct a competitive conference after those with more in common with the Big 10 and SEC leave.

(03-09-2014 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  With 24 it becomes too difficult to accommodate rivals that are located beyond your geographical division and it leaves no room for intersectional games which television loves.

As for the Big 12 and ACC getting together I would simply say that you can't join two cracked foundations and build safely upon it. The best solution is to add the strongest and best suited pieces from each to the SEC and Big 10 and then rebuild a new conference of relative peers out of the remnants. The Big 12 is too disparate in membership as too is the ACC.

Big 12 strata:
1. Texas, Oklahoma...............Kansas
2. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech...............W.V.U.
3. Baylor, ...........T.C.U.

ACC strata:
1. North Carolina, Virginia, Duke................Syracuse
2. Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh........Miami.....N.C. State
3. Boston College,.............Louisville................Wake Forest

1. Notre Dame in a class above the rest but not part of them.

Level 1 is a national brand that is the top school in their state. The only exception here is Duke.

Level 2 is an extremely strong program to moderate program but one that is not the top school in their state.

Level 3 is a good school but filler and probably private.

There are 7 national brands between the two. There are 11 strong to medium brands that are not #1 in their state. West Virginia is only ranked with these due to academics.

Level 3's will have a hard time finding a new home. Boston College because of markets and hockey has the best chance and then probably only in the Big 10.

The distance, they types of schools, the variance in their academic pursuits, and their sports emphasis all work against building something that would last out of the two conferences. It would be like two people with complimenting personality disorders saying, "I think together we can have a good marriage." It always sounds logical, but the results are seldom satisfactory.

The SEC is clearly a football first conference which is highly competitive and largely comprised of large state schools (large for the South) of which again the majority are the state flagship school of their state.

The Big 10 is clearly an academics first conference that plays great basketball, but wants to be a football first conference. The are comprised of large state schools with sound academic standing.

In both the SEC and Big 10 everyone is clear as to their priorities. In both the SEC and Big 10 profits are share and share alike. The SECN finally swept away the disparity of third tier deals in the SEC.

While the ACC has moved to share and share alike they remain 3 separate entities bound in once conference with two outliers. Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse are similar but they are decidedly big city Northern cultures. Virginia, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest are decidedly wealthy suburban schools with Southern heritage. While N.C. State and Virginia Tech are part of this grouping they are distinct in that both are more middle class and prefer football somewhat.

Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech are very different from the others. They are football first schools. But even these are very different than one another. Miami is more Northern in culture and has more in common with Syracuse, Pitt, and B.C. than any of the others. Georgia Tech is simply a stellar math and science school with Southern roots. Clemson and Florida State are the most similar.

There are three mindsets in the ACC. It is a house divided. Louisville is an outlier as is Miami. But Louisville in much farther inland and with a much different academic background.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas form the entitled culture of the Big 12. Kansas being the more mainline of those three. Oklahoma is basically in line with the SEC in most demographics but they fancy themselves as being better. Kansas is better than all but about 5 or 6 SEC schools when it comes to academics. They are a better fit for the Big 10.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech are all solid agricultural schools.

West Virginia is a total outlier but is the flagship school of its state with a mission to bring up the educational level of the rural parts of West Virginia. Much like Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State they are bound by their state legislature to make concessions on research and entrance requirements to accomplish their task of helping education statewide. This serves to handicap them in academic ranking.

Baylor is a strong private that should find a home but with 3 good state schools already in Texas it will be hard.

T.C.U. lacks the athletic diversity to truly compete at the P5 level and sustain success.

That's too much dissimilarity to build successfully upon. But between them there are enough schools in the middle range to reconstruct a competitive conference after those with more in common with the Big 10 and SEC leave.

If the PAC would just get into expansion mode, it could solve a lot of realignment issues where the Big XII is concerned. Should they revive the offer to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, then it would make finding a home for the remainder easier, especially if they offered Kansas and Kansas State as well.

My preference, of course, is for Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to end up in the SEC, along with Florida State, North Carolina and Duke. But I believe that scenario is nearly impossible. Since I've been a Texas fan since childhood, I would rather they become the Notre Dame of the South and become an independent, but that is also unlikely. A partial membership in the ACC seems odd, but it would be acceptable, certainly moreso than any scenario involving the PAC or the Big 10.

(03-09-2014 01:56 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  With 24 it becomes too difficult to accommodate rivals that are located beyond your geographical division and it leaves no room for intersectional games which television loves.

As for the Big 12 and ACC getting together I would simply say that you can't join two cracked foundations and build safely upon it. The best solution is to add the strongest and best suited pieces from each to the SEC and Big 10 and then rebuild a new conference of relative peers out of the remnants. The Big 12 is too disparate in membership as too is the ACC.

Big 12 strata:
1. Texas, Oklahoma...............Kansas
2. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech...............W.V.U.
3. Baylor, ...........T.C.U.

ACC strata:
1. North Carolina, Virginia, Duke................Syracuse
2. Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh........Miami.....N.C. State
3. Boston College,.............Louisville................Wake Forest

1. Notre Dame in a class above the rest but not part of them.

Level 1 is a national brand that is the top school in their state. The only exception here is Duke.

Level 2 is an extremely strong program to moderate program but one that is not the top school in their state.

Level 3 is a good school but filler and probably private.

There are 7 national brands between the two. There are 11 strong to medium brands that are not #1 in their state. West Virginia is only ranked with these due to academics.

Level 3's will have a hard time finding a new home. Boston College because of markets and hockey has the best chance and then probably only in the Big 10.

The distance, they types of schools, the variance in their academic pursuits, and their sports emphasis all work against building something that would last out of the two conferences. It would be like two people with complimenting personality disorders saying, "I think together we can have a good marriage." It always sounds logical, but the results are seldom satisfactory.

The SEC is clearly a football first conference which is highly competitive and largely comprised of large state schools (large for the South) of which again the majority are the state flagship school of their state.

The Big 10 is clearly an academics first conference that plays great basketball, but wants to be a football first conference. The are comprised of large state schools with sound academic standing.

In both the SEC and Big 10 everyone is clear as to their priorities. In both the SEC and Big 10 profits are share and share alike. The SECN finally swept away the disparity of third tier deals in the SEC.

While the ACC has moved to share and share alike they remain 3 separate entities bound in once conference with two outliers. Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse are similar but they are decidedly big city Northern cultures. Virginia, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest are decidedly wealthy suburban schools with Southern heritage. While N.C. State and Virginia Tech are part of this grouping they are distinct in that both are more middle class and prefer football somewhat.

Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech are very different from the others. They are football first schools. But even these are very different than one another. Miami is more Northern in culture and has more in common with Syracuse, Pitt, and B.C. than any of the others. Georgia Tech is simply a stellar math and science school with Southern roots. Clemson and Florida State are the most similar.

There are three mindsets in the ACC. It is a house divided. Louisville is an outlier as is Miami. But Louisville in much farther inland and with a much different academic background.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas form the entitled culture of the Big 12. Kansas being the more mainline of those three. Oklahoma is basically in line with the SEC in most demographics but they fancy themselves as being better. Kansas is better than all but about 5 or 6 SEC schools when it comes to academics. They are a better fit for the Big 10.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech are all solid agricultural schools.

West Virginia is a total outlier but is the flagship school of its state with a mission to bring up the educational level of the rural parts of West Virginia. Much like Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State they are bound by their state legislature to make concessions on research and entrance requirements to accomplish their task of helping education statewide. This serves to handicap them in academic ranking.

Baylor is a strong private that should find a home but with 3 good state schools already in Texas it will be hard.

T.C.U. lacks the athletic diversity to truly compete at the P5 level and sustain success.

That's too much dissimilarity to build successfully upon. But between them there are enough schools in the middle range to reconstruct a competitive conference after those with more in common with the Big 10 and SEC leave.

If the PAC would just get into expansion mode, it could solve a lot of realignment issues where the Big XII is concerned. Should they revive the offer to Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State, then it would make finding a home for the remainder easier, especially if they offered Kansas and Kansas State as well.

My preference, of course, is for Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas to end up in the SEC, along with Florida State, North Carolina and Duke. But I believe that scenario is nearly impossible. Since I've been a Texas fan since childhood, I would rather they become the Notre Dame of the South and become an independent, but that is also unlikely. A partial membership in the ACC seems odd, but it would be acceptable, certainly moreso than any scenario involving the PAC or the Big 10.

ZW, The PAC can't land product because it is the only 100% conference owned network in existence and ESPN and FOX won't release product for the move until they get a piece of it. If the PAC would sell ESPN 50% of its network then I strongly believe that Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State and Notre Dame would move to the PAC to create a 20 team conference.

ESPN raced to sign Texas with the LHN, grabbed the T3 rights of Kansas and FOX inked Oklahoma. ESPN owns all of the ACC property at all levels of media rights. I believe they hold them where they are as leverage over FOX for the Big 10's T1 media rights which are up for renegotiation in 2016. If the Big 10 inks with ESPN then Syracuse, Virginia, North Carolina and Duke could all move to the Big 10 for almost double what they will be making in the ACC. Throw in Boston College for market and either Pitt or Georgia Tech and we have a Big 10 of 20 schools.

ESPN owns 100% of the SECN. They make that venture more profitable by adding markets in North Carolina and Virignia with N.C. State and Virginia Tech, they add content value with Florida State and Clemson and then either round out with Miami, or Georgia Tech, or Pitt or Louisville.

My money is on Miami and Georgia Tech while Pitt goes Big 10.

Louisville and West Virginia, Baylor, Wake Forest, and T.C.U. are just SOL.

The Big 12 is dissolved the ACC is dissolved and the GOR's are voided.

The 60 schools in the 3 conferences make about 50 million each a year plus bowl and playoff money.

If the PAC doesn't play ball then we are looking at 4 conferences with the Big 12 likely getting absorbed in other ways or the Big 12 getting rebuilt with remnants of a parsed out ACC if the Big 10 plays ball with the Mouse.

Then I would be looking for 3 18 team conferences in the East and the PAC to remain at 12.

If both the PAC and the Big 10 refuse to relent to ESPN's leverage then we might be looking at 4 Big 12 schools to the ACC and 4 to the SEC which still dissolves the Big 12 and keeps all of that property under the ESPN banner. The easiest thing to do however would be for Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Iowa State and Texas Tech to move to the ACC. The ACC would surrender N.C. State and Virginia Tech to the SEC which would also pick up Kansas and Oklahoma State. Then there would be two conferences of 18 with three divisions of six each all geographically based. JR

(03-09-2014 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 12:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think 24 works too. You play the 5 other schools in your pod and 1 school in each of the other 3 pods for 8 conference games. If you do a rivalry game there is 9. Play the schools in the other pods every 6 years. Not ideal, but workable. In the 14 team SEC don't some of the schools only play like once every seven years? Not much different.

Or just say screw it and set it up like 2 different conferences of 12-16 schools. Schools from each side only play each other in the conference playoff or out of conference. This is something the B12 and ACC could do.

With 24 it becomes too difficult to accommodate rivals that are located beyond your geographical division and it leaves no room for intersectional games which television loves.

As for the Big 12 and ACC getting together I would simply say that you can't join two cracked foundations and build safely upon it. The best solution is to add the strongest and best suited pieces from each to the SEC and Big 10 and then rebuild a new conference of relative peers out of the remnants. The Big 12 is too disparate in membership as too is the ACC.

Big 12 strata:
1. Texas, Oklahoma...............Kansas
2. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech...............W.V.U.
3. Baylor, ...........T.C.U.

ACC strata:
1. North Carolina, Virginia, Duke................Syracuse
2. Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh........Miami.....N.C. State
3. Boston College,.............Louisville................Wake Forest

1. Notre Dame in a class above the rest but not part of them.

Level 1 is a national brand that is the top school in their state. The only exception here is Duke.

Level 2 is an extremely strong program to moderate program but one that is not the top school in their state.

Level 3 is a good school but filler and probably private.

There are 7 national brands between the two. There are 11 strong to medium brands that are not #1 in their state. West Virginia is only ranked with these due to academics.

Level 3's will have a hard time finding a new home. Boston College because of markets and hockey has the best chance and then probably only in the Big 10.

The distance, the types of schools, the variance in their academic pursuits, and their sports emphasis all work against building something that would last out of the two conferences. It would be like two people with complimenting personality disorders saying, "I think together we can have a good marriage." It always sounds logical, but the results are seldom satisfactory.

The SEC is clearly a football first conference which is highly competitive and largely comprised of large state schools (large for the South) of which again the majority are the state flagship school of their state.

The Big 10 is clearly an academics first conference that plays great basketball, but wants to be a football first conference. The are comprised of large state schools with sound academic standing.

In both the SEC and Big 10 everyone is clear as to their priorities. In both the SEC and Big 10 profits are share and share alike. The SECN finally swept away the disparity of third tier deals in the SEC.

While the ACC has moved to share and share alike they remain 3 separate entities bound in once conference with two outliers. Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse are similar but they are decidedly big city Northern cultures. Virginia, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest are decidedly wealthy suburban schools with Southern heritage. While N.C. State and Virginia Tech are part of this grouping they are distinct in that both are more middle class and prefer football somewhat.

Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech are very different from the others. They are football first schools. But even these are very different than one another. Miami is more Northern in culture and has more in common with Syracuse, Pitt, and B.C. than any of the others. Georgia Tech is simply a stellar math and science school with Southern roots. Clemson and Florida State are the most similar.

There are three mindsets in the ACC. It is a house divided. Louisville is an outlier as is Miami. But Louisville in much farther inland and with a much different academic background.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas form the entitled culture of the Big 12. Kansas being the more mainline of those three. Oklahoma is basically in line with the SEC in most demographics but they fancy themselves as being better. Kansas is better than all but about 5 or 6 SEC schools when it comes to academics. They are a better fit for the Big 10.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech are all solid agricultural schools.

West Virginia is a total outlier but is the flagship school of its state with a mission to bring up the educational level of the rural parts of West Virginia. Much like Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State they are bound by their state legislature to make concessions on research and entrance requirements to accomplish their task of helping education statewide. This serves to handicap them in academic ranking.

Baylor is a strong private that should find a home but with 3 good state schools already in Texas it will be hard.

T.C.U. lacks the athletic diversity to truly compete at the P5 level and sustain success.

That's too much dissimilarity to build successfully upon. But between them there are enough schools in the middle range to reconstruct a competitive conference after those with more in common with the Big 10 and SEC leave.

I agree 24 is not ideal, but it is workable as an 8 or 9 game conference slate. Personally, if you are going to 24 might as well go to 32 or 36, and go to 2 conferences/affiliations who meet for the NCG.

Also agree the B12 and ACC are just putting a band aid on things if they ever combine fully without losing some schools. Just too many leeches on that conference who would have more value moved to another conference. Politics in NC, TX, OK, and KS really could affect them dropping duplicated markets and merging with only 12-16 schools of the most value.

Honestly I was fine with the B12 dying in 2010, if the PAC 16 had happened. KU might have had to stay in the Big East for a short time (unlikely), but obviously the SEC and B1G would respond to the PAC 16 by expanding as well and I was certain that KU would have ended up in the B1G, most likely, SEC, or ACC if that occurred within a few years if not sooner. If it happened in 2010, MU and KU probably end up in the B1G with NU in 2010. Would have been interesting if A&M had not balked. The SEC would not have gotten them and MU the following year. Who do you think the SEC would have expanded with (KSU, ISU, Baylor, WVU?) or you think they would have stuck at 12 and gone hard after ACC schools.

To expound upon JR's statement that Oklahoma basically falls in line as an SEC school but fancies themselves better, I compared some numbers. To be fair, Vandy is not factored since an elite private school is an outlier. So, Oklahoma is included as one of 14 total schools.

Revenue - 3 of 14
Endowment - 3 of 14
ARWU - Tied with South Carolina for 8 of 14
CMUP - 11 of 14
USNWR - Tied with Tennessee for 7 of 14
Undergraduate Population - 11 of 14
Director's Cup - 3 of 14
Football Attendance - 8 of 14
Basketball Attendance - 9 of 14


So, what is Oklahoma in the SEC as currently composed? An average to below average academic, student population, athletic supporting flagship school who bring above average overall athletic results and funding.

In the Big 10 with Northwestern omitted just like Vandy, check out these results with comparison to SEC in parentheses:

Revenue - 2 of 14 (+1)
Endowment - 11 of 14 (-8)
ARWU - 14 of 14 (-6)
CMUP - 14 of 14 (-3)
USNWR - 11 of 14 (-4)
Undergraduate Population - 13 of 14 (-2)
Director's Cup - 3 of 14 (same)
Football Attendance - 5 of 14 (+3)
Basketball Attendance - 12 of 14 (-3)


So, how exactly does Oklahoma fit in better with the Big 10? They are cellar dwellers in academics, endowment, basketball, and student body. They bring a good and profitable football team... and that's it. Maybe that is all the Big 10 wants. If so, the best to them. However, any suggestion from Oklahoma that they are a better fit in the Big 10 than the SEC is silliness.

(03-09-2014 03:24 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 01:14 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 12:35 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think 24 works too. You play the 5 other schools in your pod and 1 school in each of the other 3 pods for 8 conference games. If you do a rivalry game there is 9. Play the schools in the other pods every 6 years. Not ideal, but workable. In the 14 team SEC don't some of the schools only play like once every seven years? Not much different.

Or just say screw it and set it up like 2 different conferences of 12-16 schools. Schools from each side only play each other in the conference playoff or out of conference. This is something the B12 and ACC could do.

With 24 it becomes too difficult to accommodate rivals that are located beyond your geographical division and it leaves no room for intersectional games which television loves.

As for the Big 12 and ACC getting together I would simply say that you can't join two cracked foundations and build safely upon it. The best solution is to add the strongest and best suited pieces from each to the SEC and Big 10 and then rebuild a new conference of relative peers out of the remnants. The Big 12 is too disparate in membership as too is the ACC.

Big 12 strata:
1. Texas, Oklahoma...............Kansas
2. Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Iowa State, Texas Tech...............W.V.U.
3. Baylor, ...........T.C.U.

ACC strata:
1. North Carolina, Virginia, Duke................Syracuse
2. Florida State, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh........Miami.....N.C. State
3. Boston College,.............Louisville................Wake Forest

1. Notre Dame in a class above the rest but not part of them.

Level 1 is a national brand that is the top school in their state. The only exception here is Duke.

Level 2 is an extremely strong program to moderate program but one that is not the top school in their state.

Level 3 is a good school but filler and probably private.

There are 7 national brands between the two. There are 11 strong to medium brands that are not #1 in their state. West Virginia is only ranked with these due to academics.

Level 3's will have a hard time finding a new home. Boston College because of markets and hockey has the best chance and then probably only in the Big 10.

The distance, the types of schools, the variance in their academic pursuits, and their sports emphasis all work against building something that would last out of the two conferences. It would be like two people with complimenting personality disorders saying, "I think together we can have a good marriage." It always sounds logical, but the results are seldom satisfactory.

The SEC is clearly a football first conference which is highly competitive and largely comprised of large state schools (large for the South) of which again the majority are the state flagship school of their state.

The Big 10 is clearly an academics first conference that plays great basketball, but wants to be a football first conference. The are comprised of large state schools with sound academic standing.

In both the SEC and Big 10 everyone is clear as to their priorities. In both the SEC and Big 10 profits are share and share alike. The SECN finally swept away the disparity of third tier deals in the SEC.

While the ACC has moved to share and share alike they remain 3 separate entities bound in once conference with two outliers. Boston College, Pittsburgh and Syracuse are similar but they are decidedly big city Northern cultures. Virginia, Duke, North Carolina and Wake Forest are decidedly wealthy suburban schools with Southern heritage. While N.C. State and Virginia Tech are part of this grouping they are distinct in that both are more middle class and prefer football somewhat.

Clemson, Florida State, Miami, and Georgia Tech are very different from the others. They are football first schools. But even these are very different than one another. Miami is more Northern in culture and has more in common with Syracuse, Pitt, and B.C. than any of the others. Georgia Tech is simply a stellar math and science school with Southern roots. Clemson and Florida State are the most similar.

There are three mindsets in the ACC. It is a house divided. Louisville is an outlier as is Miami. But Louisville in much farther inland and with a much different academic background.

Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas form the entitled culture of the Big 12. Kansas being the more mainline of those three. Oklahoma is basically in line with the SEC in most demographics but they fancy themselves as being better. Kansas is better than all but about 5 or 6 SEC schools when it comes to academics. They are a better fit for the Big 10.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech are all solid agricultural schools.

West Virginia is a total outlier but is the flagship school of its state with a mission to bring up the educational level of the rural parts of West Virginia. Much like Kentucky, Ole Miss, and Mississippi State they are bound by their state legislature to make concessions on research and entrance requirements to accomplish their task of helping education statewide. This serves to handicap them in academic ranking.

Baylor is a strong private that should find a home but with 3 good state schools already in Texas it will be hard.

T.C.U. lacks the athletic diversity to truly compete at the P5 level and sustain success.

That's too much dissimilarity to build successfully upon. But between them there are enough schools in the middle range to reconstruct a competitive conference after those with more in common with the Big 10 and SEC leave.

I agree 24 is not ideal, but it is workable as an 8 or 9 game conference slate. Personally, if you are going to 24 might as well go to 32 or 36, and go to 2 conferences/affiliations who meet for the NCG.

Also agree the B12 and ACC are just putting a band aid on things if they ever combine fully without losing some schools. Just too many leeches on that conference who would have more value moved to another conference. Politics in NC, TX, OK, and KS really could affect them dropping duplicated markets and merging with only 12-16 schools of the most value.

Honestly I was fine with the B12 dying in 2010, if the PAC 16 had happened. KU might have had to stay in the Big East for a short time (unlikely), but obviously the SEC and B1G would respond to the PAC 16 by expanding as well and I was certain that KU would have ended up in the B1G, most likely, SEC, or ACC if that occurred within a few years if not sooner. If it happened in 2010, MU and KU probably end up in the B1G with NU in 2010. Would have been interesting if A&M had not balked. The SEC would not have gotten them and MU the following year. Who do you think the SEC would have expanded with (KSU, ISU, Baylor, WVU?) or you think they would have stuck at 12 and gone hard after ACC schools.

Well the hypothetical has a flaw in it. Texas A&M has been in serious discussion with the SEC (awaiting an opportunity) since 1992. Upon the Texahoma plan their first phone call was to the SEC home office. There was never really a chance that they would have balked. The ties between Texas A&M and L.S.U. and Texas A&M and Alabama were too strong and the geography too compatible. But to answer your question in 1992 the SEC's first plans of going to 16 were talked about openly in SEC leadership circles. A close family member was at that time active in the circle of our university presidents and friends with Kramer. Our goals were to add 4 to the West and 2 to the East. Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, & Texas A&M were the Western teams we wanted. Clemson and Florida State were the initial Eastern targets. State politics stalled the Horns and Aggies so Oklahoma backed out too. Arkansas simply wanted out of the SWC so they came on board. Bobby Bowden pulled a last minute switch to keep Florida State from having to slug it out in the SEC when the ACC in those days was even more of a cake walk than they are today. When F.S.U. selected the ACC at the last minute an ambivalent Clemson retreated from interest. Independent South Carolina said, "Pick us!" So we did. They are the living proof of how SEC membership can shift the balance of a school's power within their own state. A&M may prove to be the second example.

While I can't prove it I'm sure that ESPN had a hand in the Missouri move.

If Texas and Oklahoma were off the boards in the West the SEC would really only have 1 objective there, a bigger slice of DFW. Oklahoma State, Baylor, and T.C.U. give us that slice. The Cowboys would be our first pick, Baylor our second. We would have to be really running out of options to consider T.C.U. which doesn't fit our profile at all. If we still needed a Western companion Kansas would be our first choice now that we have Missouri, if not Kansas perhaps a reach for Texas Tech for West Texas viewers. Kansas State would have a shot as well. I'm just not sure where they would fit our priorities. The issues with W.V.U. I've already told you about. So failing an Oklahoma State / Kansas selection we might wait for two from the East. We would have pursued F.S.U. and Clemson already if not for ESPN. Our Eastern targets now according to things I hear out of Birmingham would be: 1. North Carolina and Duke, 2. North Carolina and Virginia/Virginia Tech, 3. North Carolina State and Virginia Tech, 4. North Carolina State and F.S.U., 5. Virginia Tech and F.S.U..

A standalone archrival SEC add of North Carolina and Duke would be an atom bomb to those fan bases. The only other such add that would bring that level of extreme highs and lows from fans would be Ohio State/Michigan.

An alliance to form a new, 20 team super conference between 9 of the 10 Big 12 (sorry ISU) and the southern ACC teams would have worked quite well:

KSU
KU
OU
OSU

UT
BU
TTU
TCU

UMD
WVU
UVA
VT

UNC
DU
WF
NCSU

GT
CU
FSU
UM

(03-09-2014 12:13 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  A standalone archrival SEC add of North Carolina and Duke would be an atom bomb to those fan bases. The only other such add that would bring that level of extreme highs and lows from fans would be Ohio State/Michigan.

Understand that the talks that produced that Duo as a possibility were due diligence conversations that North Carolina had with the SEC immediately following the Maryland departure and before Notre Dame joined partially and the GOR was signed. The climate at that time was total uncertainty within the ACC. Virginia's rumored involvement with the Big 10 and Clemson's and F.S.U.'s public flirtations painted a very dark picture. North Carolina wanted to make sure that Duke was part of their escape plan if one was needed. But yes the conference office would likely be in favor of such a move and it would be atomic, because if it came about it would in essence mean the ACC was no more.

(03-09-2014 12:31 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  An alliance to form a new, 20 team super conference between 9 of the 10 Big 12 (sorry ISU) and the southern ACC teams would have worked quite well:

KSU
KU
OU
OSU

UT
BU
TTU
TCU

UMD
WVU
UVA
VT

UNC
DU
WF
NCSU

GT
CU
FSU
UM

Double the leaches and double the travel. With double the mistrust and quadruple the stratification. Especially since Maryland led the charge to keep W.V.U. out of the ACC and North Carolina is the biggest resistance to adding Texas and buddies to the ACC. (They fear 4 Texas votes added to Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech and F.S.U.) I don't see it.

Clemson may not be a "national brand" in the same sense that you are talking about, but they are the top school in South Carolina.

(03-09-2014 04:30 PM)XLance Wrote:  Clemson may not be a "national brand" in the same sense that you are talking about, but they are the top school in South Carolina.

I agree that they once were. Whether they are still is debatable. I do agree however that they are a very good school. I guess it depends upon which metrics are used to make the determination.

The cold, hard truth about some of the OU SEC resistance, based on what I hear from OU people, is that the administration is worried that if OU goes to the SEC they will begin cheating again like they used to do. Their compliance office is not under the AD anymore; it is under their law department. The end of the Switzer era was a major embarrassment for them and they don't want a repeat. Rightly or wrongly, almost all resistance to the SEC is based on their fears that their boosters might start getting them in trouble again trying to compete in the perceived SEC dog eat dog recruiting world. That and they need one of OSU or UT to be in the same conference ideally. Lot of their fans would love the SEC.

As far as academics, BBB is right OU is a great fit for the SEC. So are Texas and Kansas though with their AAU status they are also an academic fit for the B1G (or PAC) as well. OU desperately wants to attain AAU status. That is why the B1G is so attractive to them. That is 13 votes they MIGHT be able to count on when their possible membership is discussed. Right now the B1G is the only conference that might be able to land them without taking OSU or Texas due to their lust to join the AAU. The main reason the B1G wants OU is for it's football, same as NU (B1G schools knew NU was losing AAU before it even joined and most voted against NU in the AAU vote). It also makes the B1G more enticing to Texas if OU, and maybe KU, is there. OU fans are really split on the SEC, B1G, and PAC if the B12 dies.

ESPN definitely said take MU over WVU. Six million people versus 2 million was easy math for them. MU is also AAU which makes presidents wet themselves with glee. Plus, MU has had long time relationships with OU, KU, and shorter ones with A&M and Texas. Smart move if you ever want to add any of the triad of big dogs from the B12 in the future, no matter how strained some of those relationships are at the moment.

I know the B12 was told to add WVU after MU left. They were the most valuable addition available according to the networks. BC's aD came right out and said that ESPN told the ACC who to add. I know that FOX is pushing the B12 to take UCF and USF so Fox can gain a toehold in the SE. If the B12 only adds 2 schools to get to 12, I think those 2 are the front runners because FOX will pay more for them than Cincinnati or BYU.

(03-09-2014 12:43 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-09-2014 12:31 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  An alliance to form a new, 20 team super conference between 9 of the 10 Big 12 (sorry ISU) and the southern ACC teams would have worked quite well:

KSU
KU
OU
OSU

UT
BU
TTU
TCU

UMD
WVU
UVA
VT

UNC
DU
WF
NCSU

GT
CU
FSU
UM

Double the leaches and double the travel. With double the mistrust and quadruple the stratification. Especially since Maryland led the charge to keep W.V.U. out of the ACC and North Carolina is the biggest resistance to adding Texas and buddies to the ACC. (They fear 4 Texas votes added to Clemson, Miami, Georgia Tech and F.S.U.) I don't see it.

I would love to see Texas, ND, and UNC in the same conference. Tobacco road mafia versus oil tycoons. Football schools versus basketball schools. The ego clashes would be epic fun.

If the ACC became financially untenable, then I could see UNC joining with Texas to form a new conference. They would still be a king in the new conference just not THE king any more. If they move to the B1G or SEC they would have even less power than they would in a merged B12/ACC. Really would depend on what their donors and administration want. Cultural fit => SEC; Academic fit => B1G; power and control => merged ACC/B12. My guess is they would go to the SEC. I think the B1G knows this as well, and if OSU insiders are to believed, both ND and UNC are not expected to ever be part of the B1G.

I think UNC will push for KU to be added to any group of B12 schools going to the ACC, if the B12, fails because UNC and KU have some ties (especially the BB programs), plus KU is a basketball school and so UNC might figure KU would vote with them more often than not.

An ACC/B12 merger must jettison some of the baggage and duplication though. My perfect 16 school B12/ACC merger would be:

East
UNC
FSU
UVA
Duke
GT
Miami
Clemson
WVU

West
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
TTU
OSU
Iowa State
Louisville
KSU or Baylor

ND as a partial member.

SEC adds NCST and VT. The B1G picks up two northern ACC schools. Eight B12 schools so you can dissolve it and 8 ACC schools, plus enough finding homes in the SEC/B1G to dissolve it as well. B1G gets the NE to themselves, but is blocked out of the southeast and southwest which belong to the SEC and ACC/B12.

Twenty teams starts adding too many mouths to feed. The SEC or B1G considering going to 20 makes sense because if they do they will probably be adding schools at 17-20 of very high value that would add money rather than leech it way. A 20 school ACC/B12 would have leeches at 17-20.

(03-09-2014 11:49 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  The cold, hard truth about some of the OU SEC resistance, based on what I hear from OU people, is that the administration is worried that if OU goes to the SEC they will begin cheating again like they used to do. Their compliance office is not under the AD anymore; it is under their law department. The end of the Switzer era was a major embarrassment for them and they don't want a repeat. Rightly or wrongly, almost all resistance to the SEC is based on their fears that their boosters might start getting them in trouble again trying to compete in the perceived SEC dog eat dog recruiting world. That and they need one of OSU or UT to be in the same conference ideally. Lot of their fans would love the SEC.

As far as academics, BBB is right OU is a great fit for the SEC. So are Texas and Kansas though with their AAU status they are also an academic fit for the B1G (or PAC) as well. OU desperately wants to attain AAU status. That is why the B1G is so attractive to them. That is 13 votes they MIGHT be able to count on when their possible membership is discussed. Right now the B1G is the only conference that might be able to land them without taking OSU or Texas due to their lust to join the AAU. The main reason the B1G wants OU is for it's football, same as NU (B1G schools knew NU was losing AAU before it even joined and most voted against NU in the AAU vote). It also makes the B1G more enticing to Texas if OU, and maybe KU, is there. OU fans are really split on the SEC, B1G, and PAC if the B12 dies.

ESPN definitely said take MU over WVU. Six million people versus 2 million was easy math for them. MU is also AAU which makes presidents wet themselves with glee. Plus, MU has had long time relationships with OU, KU, and shorter ones with A&M and Texas. Smart move if you ever want to add any of the triad of big dogs from the B12 in the future, no matter how strained some of those relationships are at the moment.

I know the B12 was told to add WVU after MU left. They were the most valuable addition available according to the networks. BC's aD came right out and said that ESPN told the ACC who to add. I know that FOX is pushing the B12 to take UCF and USF so Fox can gain a toehold in the SE. If the B12 only adds 2 schools to get to 12, I think those 2 are the front runners because FOX will pay more for them than Cincinnati or BYU.

Whether the SEC has a shot at Texas, Oklahoma, or Kansas will depend upon whether the PAC ever sells half or more of their rights to the PACN. Only then do I see a Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas with little brothers to the PAC. Sans that what ESPN does or does not do to try to gain the renewal of the Big 10's T1 rights becomes the next question. Since giving up some ACC schools might appease Delany more right now it coupled with the SEC's taking of a North Carolina and Virginia school might open up enough slots for six Big 12 schools to form a Western Division of the ACC.

Let's say that Syracuse and Boston College make a move to the Big 10. It would be the perfect time for the ACC to cut loose redundant properties in Virginia Tech and N.C. State too. That would give them the perfect opportunity to add Texas as an independent and Baylor, T.C.U., Kansas State and Oklahoma as full members raising their conference membership to 16 full members with two affiliates. It would raise their cache tremendously and give them four equal divisions while providing ESPN some options for the use of Texas. Now that kind of merger would make the ACC stronger. They would be cutting loose their most Northern outliers and eliminating redundancy in their footprint while adding 31 million viewers to their footprint and cache to the football resume.

The SEC could go to 18 with Oklahoma State and Kansas.

If the Big 10 says no to ESPN then what I think the best scenario would be would have the SEC and ACC taking 8 of the Big 12 schools. The best scenario there would be the SEC taking Oklahoma State and Kansas along with Virginia Tech and N.C. State and the ACC adding 6 full members (Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Kansas State, Iowa State and Baylor).

But whatever happens I think ESPN will use their access to property for gaining rights.

Maybe the ACC and SEC will come to realize that they can gain share money by eliminating the Big 12. If each took 4 schools they could dissolve the conference. Then the ACC and SEC could partner and they would be 36 schools plus Notre Dame, they would have 7 of the top 10 schools in revenue between them, they could all share one whopper of a network if they chose to do so and ESPN would essentially own the two most rabid fan bases in college football (Big 12 and SEC) and the largest footprint in college sports (ACC) which added to the SEC and Big 12 would stretch from Texas to New York and Massachusetts and be inclusive of everything in between. It is an end game scenario for ESPN and should be one for the SEC and ACC.

I think this summer will be interesting. Presidents and ADs will have more time to devote to the issues of the future of college sports. I think there is another NCAA meeting about a new NCAA division/powers for the P5 in June. Maybe the Maryland/ACC case will be settled or things will get even nastier and dirty laundry will start to get out putting pressure on ESPN. Hopefully, by next football season some things will be much clearer as far as realignment goes.

(04-02-2014 12:16 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think this summer will be interesting. Presidents and ADs will have more time to devote to the issues of the future of college sports. I think there is another NCAA meeting about a new NCAA division/powers for the P5 in June. Maybe the Maryland/ACC case will be settled or things will get even nastier and dirty laundry will start to get out putting pressure on ESPN. Hopefully, by next football season some things will be much clearer as far as realignment goes.

I hope your're right. I don't think the P5 will ever have the flexibility necessary to deal with the fast changes and challenges being mounted by O'Bannon & Northwestern's Union overtures as long as they remain in the NCAA. And the need to monetize basketball more completely is hanging in the air as well. A breakaway would provide the kind of atmosphere where significant structural changes could take place. We'll see.

(04-02-2014 01:23 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-02-2014 12:16 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  I think this summer will be interesting. Presidents and ADs will have more time to devote to the issues of the future of college sports. I think there is another NCAA meeting about a new NCAA division/powers for the P5 in June. Maybe the Maryland/ACC case will be settled or things will get even nastier and dirty laundry will start to get out putting pressure on ESPN. Hopefully, by next football season some things will be much clearer as far as realignment goes.

I hope your're right. I don't think the P5 will ever have the flexibility necessary to deal with the fast changes and challenges being mounted by O'Bannon & Northwestern's Union overtures as long as they remain in the NCAA. And the need to monetize basketball more completely is hanging in the air as well. A breakaway would provide the kind of atmosphere where significant structural changes could take place. We'll see.

I hope there is a breakaway too. I am hoping the smaller schools resist what the P5 is looking for. I think the NCAA is severely dysfunctional and should be put out of it's misery. I am not sure it can be fixed in its current state. I agree that a new association would be best with rules and rules enforcement for the modern age with a much smaller membership to police and less money to run. As a alum of a BB blue blood I drool at the thought of basketball being valued correctly when removed from the NCAA's dirty paws (and my school getting a bump in value). Problem is school presidents are notoriously conservative and a breakaway at this point would be a huge step for them instead of the tiny little baby steps they prefer. However, maybe all these law suits (and the decreasing state funding for universities you often mention) will change the dynamics in such a way that a breakaway is seen as the best possible path to a prosperous future for major college athletics.

One of the things that is creating a problem for a break-away is the issue of paying players. The "true cost" of attending a particular school may vary widely from one institution to another. If every P5 school gave the players the same amount, it would be a lawsuit in the making, because we would be back to where we started.
There will be no break away until all other alternatives within the NCAA have been exhausted. Then and only then will the P5 form committees, hold conferences and propose rules well before there is any serious consideration of leaving the NCAA.