That exercise above was kinda fun... as a lifelong Tennessean, I think below is the pod that Tennessee would choose:

Tennessee

Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Kentucky
North Carolina
Virginia Tech
Auburn or South Carolina

If North Carolina or Virginia Tech could be added for all sports, I think most UT fans would not hesitate to drop Vanderbilt. Vandy-UT games in Nashville are really just a chance for UT fans in Middle Tennessee to see UT play.

(05-14-2014 02:04 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  That exercise above was kinda fun... as a lifelong Tennessean, I think below is the pod that Tennessee would choose:

Tennessee

Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Kentucky
North Carolina
Virginia Tech
Auburn or South Carolina

If North Carolina or Virginia Tech could be added for all sports, I think most UT fans would not hesitate to drop Vanderbilt. Vandy-UT games in Nashville are really just a chance for UT fans in Middle Tennessee to see UT play.

I'd pick Auburn and call that pod a done deal. And you're point regarding Vandy is spot on.

(05-14-2014 02:04 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  That exercise above was kinda fun... as a lifelong Tennessean, I think below is the pod that Tennessee would choose:

Tennessee

Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Kentucky
North Carolina
Virginia Tech
Auburn or South Carolina

If North Carolina or Virginia Tech could be added for all sports, I think most UT fans would not hesitate to drop Vanderbilt. Vandy-UT games in Nashville are really just a chance for UT fans in Middle Tennessee to see UT play.

I really do think that the divisions become better mini conferences than the ones we have now. Regionalism is becoming more important than ever but at a time when ever ounce of overhead needs to be saved and consolidation makes oodles of sense from that perspective. I also think that Network interests have to be accounted for and this system does that. But upon second reflection I think the networks would probably need to pay the Continental schools at least 25 million per year to overcome Big 12, PAC, and ACC existing revenues in a way that would encourage all toward the move. Anyway I think it has tremendous advantages over other models in that the SEC and Big 10 maintain identity without having to compromise standards and the buffer conference is fair. Nobody gets left out, more deserving schools are included, and 72 does give us more of field to play and keep balance. It also gives all three conferences good markets and the balance will protect the games and the structure. Should the Big 10 or SEC by themselves grow too strong it could damage college sports altogether. There is practically noone in the present Big 10 that the SEC would covet and very few in the SEC that the Big 10 might covet. And even then the addition of the 4 California schools and Washington and Oregon offset wonderfully the need of Virginia, North Carolina, Texas, or Oklahoma and therein lies the balance.

Yes, a lot of good points there, JR. In terms of true fit, you are right, there is no crossover between the Big 10 and SEC except for Missouri. If we are all being honest, Missouri seems to be a very congenial school and fan base that would have been all smiles and found a way to make it work in either conference. As a border south/north, urban/rural state with AAU status, they really could have gone either way. Kentucky could fit in the Big 10 except for academics, and Ohio State as a school and program could fit into the SEC except for, well, all those Ohioans. Maryland could work if UVA and UNC all came along. Other than that...

(05-14-2014 02:28 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  Yes, a lot of good points there, JR. In terms of true fit, you are right, there is no crossover between the Big 10 and SEC except for Missouri. If we are all being honest, Missouri seems to be a very congenial school and fan base that would have been all smiles and found a way to make it work in either conference. As a border south/north, urban/rural state with AAU status, they really could have gone either way. Kentucky could fit in the Big 10 except for academics, and Ohio State as a school and program could fit into the SEC except for, well, all those Ohioans. Maryland could work if UVA and UNC all came along. Other than that...

Well, we just need to add Kansas to Missouri.

(05-14-2014 12:48 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  For my 2 cents, this is my ideal 20 team SEC:



Alabama/Arkansas/Auburn/Florida/Florida State/Georgia/Kansas/Kentucky/Louisiana State/Mississippi/Mississippi State/Missouri/North Carolina State/Oklahoma State/South Carolina/Tennessee/Texas A&M/West Virginia/Vanderbilt

An ideal mix of teams and markets all with enough SEC gusto to keep what makes the conference special still there.

OSU/Missouri/Arkansas/Kansas bring in the KC-SL mid west

OSU/Arkansas/A&M bring in DFW

A&M/LSU brings in greater Houston

FSU/UF combo locks pretty much all of up Florida

NCSU and VT bring in NC and VA with another 18 million people (ie adding a second Florida)

VT/WVU gets us into the D.C. market

WVU gets us into the Pittsburgh market

10th none of those schools are physically in DFW.

But they have this thing called huge fan bases.

I understand if Baylor knows nothing about them!

Interesting. You can put Kansas in the SEC or B1G. Both those conferences would be amazing. The problem is the Continental has no helmet FB programs. It might be better to let it start with fewer schools and promote schools from below who show they will spend the money to be competitive. If you were doing an 8 school playoff, I would just have one auto from each conference and 5 at large schools. A better option, IMO, is a 5 team playoff 3 CCG winners plus 2 at large, who have a play in game.

That said, however, I like 4 or 2 conferences. I hate the playoff layout with an odd number of conferences. Keep it nice and simple. Decide everything on the field. Win your conference make the playoffs or play for the championship with conference semis and CCG basically becoming part of the playoff. The best part is it rewards schools for taking chances in non-conference since you can play a tough schedule, battle test your team, and take some losses, but if you roll in conference that will get you to the playoffs. We would get much better match ups out of conference if this is the case. If we have at large berths, schools will try to keep scheduling either 1 or no tough out of conference opponents so if they lose the conference they still have a shot at the at large berth(s) recordwise.

(05-15-2014 12:36 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  Interesting. You can put Kansas in the SEC or B1G. Both those conferences would be amazing. The problem is the Continental has no helmet FB programs. It might be better to let it start with fewer schools and promote schools from below who show they will spend the money to be competitive. If you were doing an 8 school playoff, I would just have one auto from each conference and 5 at large schools. A better option, IMO, is a 5 team playoff 3 CCG winners plus 2 at large, who have a play in game.

That said, however, I like 4 or 2 conferences. I hate the playoff layout with an odd number of conferences. Keep it nice and simple. Decide everything on the field. Win your conference make the playoffs or play for the championship with conference semis and CCG basically becoming part of the playoff. The best part is it rewards schools for taking chances in non-conference since you can play a tough schedule, battle test your team, and take some losses, but if you roll in conference that will get you to the playoffs. We would get much better match ups out of conference if this is the case. If we have at large berths, schools will try to keep scheduling either 1 or no tough out of conference opponents so if they lose the conference they still have a shot at the at large berth(s) recordwise.

I'm totally on base with 4 champions and have been one of the few SEC guys to push for it from the before we went to the committee for the new playoff. Unfortunately I doubt we move to 4 conferences. The SEC and Big 10 will remain ahead of the others in earnings, audience, markets, and therefore in strength. Eventually that strength will lead to further consolidation and if it is not controlled then at some point, especially if either the SEC or Big 10 gains an advantage the other can not overcome then the imbalance will damage the game permanently.

The Continental Conference is not supposed to have any helmet teams. It is supposed to be a buffer with complete access. The top 48 progams will find their way into the SEC and Big 10 for the most part. Limiting their growth to 24 is the best way to bring balance. The SEC and Big 10 proposed would be relatively equal but by different avenues of power. The Continental is designed to take the best of the rest and give them access to the playoffs without having to directly go through helmet programs. They can schedule helmet programs OOC if they wish, or they can grow their brands relatively free of the consistent beat downs and provide the true underdog. Besides if you look at them they are relatively equal in power and would be extremely competitive with one another. And their geographical groupings are reasonably tight so as to make their minor sports more affordable, and their markets are as broad as the Big 10's would be giving them a little extra boost.

I don't know how old you are but I am assuming you are relatively young. Back before the CFA there was talk of forming a super conference of about 24 schools, helmet programs only, and bypassing the rest. It failed for many reasons, but chief among the reasons it failed because there wouldn't be enough guaranteed wins to produce the winners that people love to back as bandwagon fans. The other big reason the concept died was the feared backlash from those left behind.

Well here we are 40 years later and those two issues remain. If the SEC and Big 10 only took the programs that fit their concept we would be looking at 2 twenty or twenty four team conferences. With the Continental noone presently in a P5 is left out and the most deserving bubble schools are already included. This will help records, reduce animus, flesh out post season tournaments, and eradicate the few schools with the best shot at making legal trouble for any admission standards set for the new upper tier. And it provides a conference that other theoretically could expand into and simultaneously provides a proving ground for any schools which the SEC or Big 10 might choose to pursue at a later date should they decide to expand. It will be fully included in every way but would not have to be paid the same as the Big 10 or SEC who also will not receive identical pay. So from an earnings perspective it helps the networks gradate their payouts according to markets, attendance, and level of competition. This is necessary to include schools which otherwise might get left behind and which do not add value to the markets of the Big 10 and SEC.

No it's not ideal, but it provides a more balanced structure as the SEC/Big 10 stand relatively in equal opposition to one another while the Continental represents those who crave a shot and will get it every year.

As to at large berths in playoffs I totally agree with your position, but the networks will not agree with any of us. They like an underdog or two, but much prefer top brands from each region of the country because that's what maximizes eyes on the tube for the longest duration. Therefore if a Mississippi State or Iowa has a big run a runner up Ohio State or Florida can still get into the playoffs for the advertising benefit if nothing else. It's about winning it on the field for you and me, but it is only about money for the networks.

I think this system gives the Big 10 the AAU status large schools that they want for their profile. It gives the SEC the state flagships they crave for theirs. Those two conferences will make millions off of their internal 4 team playoff. The Continental won't do so bad either and many more of their fans will feel they have a shot by not being confronted by helmet programs along their way.

But anyway, I do understand your viewpoint, and have held that one myself. But do consider these other factors.

If we moved to four conferences the PAC and ACC would always be behind the pay curve and for long term stability that's a problem.

(05-13-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Since the PAC is having difficulty finding carriage and their revenue is nowhere near that of the Big 10, and since the Big 10 needs football props and further expansion in the East won't get that done. And since the CIC requirements are for AAU schools here is what a recent rumor could lead to if it was ever acted upon by FOX and the Big 10/PAC.

The Big 10 would add 10 schools nine of which would be from the PAC and Notre Dame who would finally have all of the following in their new conference home: U.S.C., Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue and would have more money. They could utilize 1 non conference game for Navy and one for either Oklahoma or Texas and play 10 conference games, all while getting more money.

Since this kind of move would provoke an action by ESPN the SEC is a similarly constructed Mega Conference.

Then the remaining conference could be shared by ESPN and FOX and would provide an interesting regional mix of teams that fit together fairly well.




Big 10:
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St., Penn St., Purdue, Rutgers

Central:
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan St., Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

West:
Arizona, Arizona St., California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington




SEC:
East:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt

West:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana St., Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M




Continental Conference:
East:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central:
Baylor, Houston, Miami, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

West:
Boise St, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Fresno St., Oregon St., San Diego St., Washington St., Utah




Each conference would be guaranteed 2 playoff spots and the remaining 2 spots would be at large and all would be upper tier conferences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

What makes anyone think that ND would ever want to be part of any conference, but in particular the Big Ten?

(05-17-2014 12:45 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Since the PAC is having difficulty finding carriage and their revenue is nowhere near that of the Big 10, and since the Big 10 needs football props and further expansion in the East won't get that done. And since the CIC requirements are for AAU schools here is what a recent rumor could lead to if it was ever acted upon by FOX and the Big 10/PAC.

The Big 10 would add 10 schools nine of which would be from the PAC and Notre Dame who would finally have all of the following in their new conference home: U.S.C., Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue and would have more money. They could utilize 1 non conference game for Navy and one for either Oklahoma or Texas and play 10 conference games, all while getting more money.

Since this kind of move would provoke an action by ESPN the SEC is a similarly constructed Mega Conference.

Then the remaining conference could be shared by ESPN and FOX and would provide an interesting regional mix of teams that fit together fairly well.




Big 10:
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St., Penn St., Purdue, Rutgers

Central:
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan St., Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

West:
Arizona, Arizona St., California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington




SEC:
East:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt

West:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana St., Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M




Continental Conference:
East:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central:
Baylor, Houston, Miami, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

West:
Boise St, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Fresno St., Oregon St., San Diego St., Washington St., Utah




Each conference would be guaranteed 2 playoff spots and the remaining 2 spots would be at large and all would be upper tier conferences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

What makes anyone think that ND would ever want to be part of any conference, but in particular the Big Ten?

Your feelings on the issue are appreciated and duly noted.

(05-17-2014 03:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 12:45 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Since the PAC is having difficulty finding carriage and their revenue is nowhere near that of the Big 10, and since the Big 10 needs football props and further expansion in the East won't get that done. And since the CIC requirements are for AAU schools here is what a recent rumor could lead to if it was ever acted upon by FOX and the Big 10/PAC.

The Big 10 would add 10 schools nine of which would be from the PAC and Notre Dame who would finally have all of the following in their new conference home: U.S.C., Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue and would have more money. They could utilize 1 non conference game for Navy and one for either Oklahoma or Texas and play 10 conference games, all while getting more money.

Since this kind of move would provoke an action by ESPN the SEC is a similarly constructed Mega Conference.

Then the remaining conference could be shared by ESPN and FOX and would provide an interesting regional mix of teams that fit together fairly well.




Big 10:
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St., Penn St., Purdue, Rutgers

Central:
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan St., Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

West:
Arizona, Arizona St., California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington




SEC:
East:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt

West:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana St., Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M




Continental Conference:
East:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central:
Baylor, Houston, Miami, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

West:
Boise St, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Fresno St., Oregon St., San Diego St., Washington St., Utah




Each conference would be guaranteed 2 playoff spots and the remaining 2 spots would be at large and all would be upper tier conferences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

What makes anyone think that ND would ever want to be part of any conference, but in particular the Big Ten?

Your feelings on the issue are appreciated and duly noted.

Oh, I know, but I was asking a serious question.

Why in the world would ND want to be part of the Big Ten, even this imagined one?

More money? ND funds all of its 26 athletic programs and sends about $20 million per year to the academic side of the university.

ND is not under any monetary pressure. In fact, the backlash from donors may make a Big Ten move a negative cash event, at least for some time.

(05-13-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Since the PAC is having difficulty finding carriage and their revenue is nowhere near that of the Big 10, and since the Big 10 needs football props and further expansion in the East won't get that done. And since the CIC requirements are for AAU schools here is what a recent rumor could lead to if it was ever acted upon by FOX and the Big 10/PAC.

The Big 10 would add 10 schools nine of which would be from the PAC and Notre Dame who would finally have all of the following in their new conference home: U.S.C., Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue and would have more money. They could utilize 1 non conference game for Navy and one for either Oklahoma or Texas and play 10 conference games, all while getting more money.

Since this kind of move would provoke an action by ESPN the SEC is a similarly constructed Mega Conference.

Then the remaining conference could be shared by ESPN and FOX and would provide an interesting regional mix of teams that fit together fairly well.




Big 10:
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St., Penn St., Purdue, Rutgers

Central:
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan St., Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

West:
Arizona, Arizona St., California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington




SEC:
East:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt

West:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana St., Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M




Continental Conference:
East:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central:
Baylor, Houston, Miami, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

West:
Boise St, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Fresno St., Oregon St., San Diego St., Washington St., Utah




Each conference would be guaranteed 2 playoff spots and the remaining 2 spots would be at large and all would be upper tier conferences.

Bold =
(Except for UConn non-football)

(05-17-2014 08:06 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 03:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 12:45 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-13-2014 09:06 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Since the PAC is having difficulty finding carriage and their revenue is nowhere near that of the Big 10, and since the Big 10 needs football props and further expansion in the East won't get that done. And since the CIC requirements are for AAU schools here is what a recent rumor could lead to if it was ever acted upon by FOX and the Big 10/PAC.

The Big 10 would add 10 schools nine of which would be from the PAC and Notre Dame who would finally have all of the following in their new conference home: U.S.C., Stanford, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue and would have more money. They could utilize 1 non conference game for Navy and one for either Oklahoma or Texas and play 10 conference games, all while getting more money.

Since this kind of move would provoke an action by ESPN the SEC is a similarly constructed Mega Conference.

Then the remaining conference could be shared by ESPN and FOX and would provide an interesting regional mix of teams that fit together fairly well.




Big 10:
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Notre Dame, Ohio St., Penn St., Purdue, Rutgers

Central:
Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan St., Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

West:
Arizona, Arizona St., California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington




SEC:
East:
Clemson, Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Central:
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt

West:
Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana St., Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M




Continental Conference:
East:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Central:
Baylor, Houston, Miami, Iowa St., Kansas St., Oklahoma St., T.C.U., Texas Tech

West:
Boise St, Brigham Young, Colorado State, Fresno St., Oregon St., San Diego St., Washington St., Utah




Each conference would be guaranteed 2 playoff spots and the remaining 2 spots would be at large and all would be upper tier conferences.

Thanks, but no thanks.

What makes anyone think that ND would ever want to be part of any conference, but in particular the Big Ten?

Your feelings on the issue are appreciated and duly noted.

Oh, I know, but I was asking a serious question.

Why in the world would ND want to be part of the Big Ten, even this imagined one?

More money? ND funds all of its 26 athletic programs and sends about $20 million per year to the academic side of the university.

ND is not under any monetary pressure. In fact, the backlash from donors may make a Big Ten move a negative cash event, at least for some time.

That and the B1G's very long and well-documented history of hating Catholics.

So, nobody has an answer as to how this would benefit ND?

(05-18-2014 03:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  So, nobody has an answer as to how this would benefit ND?

When we move to 3 or 4 conferences membership in one of them will give Notre Dame access to the playoffs. Since that scenario is anathema to Irish fans anyway they might as well move to the conference where they can play the most of their annual games and get paid the best.

All of this is about creating a structure and access to playoffs that is managed internally and puts forth a champion from each region of the country for the playoffs. This is a network agenda as it maximizes the nations interest as opposed to having two SEC schools a Big 12 school and 1 from either the ACC, PAC, or Big 10, or vice versa. That format is a loser for the network advertising rates. That's why in this network acquisition of an undervalued product we are going to move to 4 conferences all of which will have two rounds of games internally to decide a champion followed by the 4 champions playoff. The structure is fair, engages all areas of the nation through the semifinals, will not need a committee to decide the entrants, and there will be no room for anyone outside of the 4 conference structure. For the Irish the ACC would be the best fit as a conference in a 4 conference structure. In a 3 conferences structure which would only emerge with some power grab play by the Big 10 to boost its cable network and fatten FOX's inventory of schools you would face a scenario quite possibly like the one presented in this thread. Personally I would prefer 4 conferences. We'll see.

(05-18-2014 08:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-18-2014 03:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  So, nobody has an answer as to how this would benefit ND?

When we move to 3 or 4 conferences membership in one of them will give Notre Dame access to the playoffs. Since that scenario is anathema to Irish fans anyway they might as well move to the conference where they can play the most of their annual games and get paid the best.

All of this is about creating a structure and access to playoffs that is managed internally and puts forth a champion from each region of the country for the playoffs. This is a network agenda as it maximizes the nations interest as opposed to having two SEC schools a Big 12 school and 1 from either the ACC, PAC, or Big 10, or vice versa. That format is a loser for the network advertising rates. That's why in this network acquisition of an undervalued product we are going to move to 4 conferences all of which will have two rounds of games internally to decide a champion followed by the 4 champions playoff. The structure is fair, engages all areas of the nation through the semifinals, will not need a committee to decide the entrants, and there will be no room for anyone outside of the 4 conference structure. For the Irish the ACC would be the best fit as a conference in a 4 conference structure. In a 3 conferences structure which would only emerge with some power grab play by the Big 10 to boost its cable network and fatten FOX's inventory of schools you would face a scenario quite possibly like the one presented in this thread. Personally I would prefer 4 conferences. We'll see.

I have read mountains of material on conference realignment and personally am still not convinced that a 3 or 4 conference structure is going to occur.

Certainly, it is not inevitable, in my view.

We will have to proceed on two different belief systems here.

Mine is that the disparate, regional, parochial interests of certain schools and conferences, plus basic inertia regarding college athletic structure, will ultimately frustrate the 4 x 16 enthusiasts, just like the recent ACC GOR signing did.

(05-18-2014 09:03 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-18-2014 08:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-18-2014 03:37 PM)TerryD Wrote:  So, nobody has an answer as to how this would benefit ND?

When we move to 3 or 4 conferences membership in one of them will give Notre Dame access to the playoffs. Since that scenario is anathema to Irish fans anyway they might as well move to the conference where they can play the most of their annual games and get paid the best.

All of this is about creating a structure and access to playoffs that is managed internally and puts forth a champion from each region of the country for the playoffs. This is a network agenda as it maximizes the nations interest as opposed to having two SEC schools a Big 12 school and 1 from either the ACC, PAC, or Big 10, or vice versa. That format is a loser for the network advertising rates. That's why in this network acquisition of an undervalued product we are going to move to 4 conferences all of which will have two rounds of games internally to decide a champion followed by the 4 champions playoff. The structure is fair, engages all areas of the nation through the semifinals, will not need a committee to decide the entrants, and there will be no room for anyone outside of the 4 conference structure. For the Irish the ACC would be the best fit as a conference in a 4 conference structure. In a 3 conferences structure which would only emerge with some power grab play by the Big 10 to boost its cable network and fatten FOX's inventory of schools you would face a scenario quite possibly like the one presented in this thread. Personally I would prefer 4 conferences. We'll see.

I have read mountains of material on conference realignment and personally am still not convinced that a 3 or 4 conference structure is going to occur.

Certainly, it is not inevitable, in my view.

We will have to proceed on two different belief systems here.

Mine is that the disparate, regional, parochial interests of certain schools and conferences, plus basic inertia regarding college athletic structure, will ultimately frustrate the 4 x 16 enthusiasts, just like the recent ACC GOR signing did.

I understand that point of view and acknowledge that it is a possible outcome. I just don't believe it to be the likely outcome. My reason is simple. The vast majority of moves have been made for the dangled income carrots being held by the networks. Just as with the Maryland case and the ACC realignment from the Big East leaks of network involvement have been rather extensive. SEC expansion eastward was never an issue because ESPN wouldn't pay for it. All speculation in that area was predicated upon a defensive strategy to be employed should the Big 10 raid prove more potentially threatening (a time that has passed) and upon making space for bigger fish from the Big 12, all of which was network inspired. This was also the impetus behind the LHN to thwart the PAC from poaching property the networks coveted and why the PACN has had trouble getting distribution. Ignoring the network maneuvers and claiming Delany and Slive are behind the moves seems to me to be delusional. Note, I'm not saying that you ignore these angles, but a vast majority of posters on this board give too little thought to it. If the networks won't pay it won't happen.

The economy isn't recovering anytime soon and we are likely to follow the stagnation of the Japanese market that was our predecessor in trying to inflate its way out of difficulty. Therefore I believe that institutions that rely upon State and Federal money will continue to try to milk non traditional revenue streams which will lead us to a structure more conducive to ad revenue. But I respect your position. Take care Terry. JR

I understand that the networks are behind expansion moves. That is beyond dispute.

I also understand that most states are bankrupt and that impacts state supported schools.

That said, I still don't think the networks are going to get their way completely and/or that enough schools, particularly the key ones (Texas, North Carolina, ND) are going to make the radical moves required to fulfil this vision.

That said, I will stop polluting your board with my stubborn, anachronistic viewpoints. Take care, JR.

(05-18-2014 10:10 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I understand that the networks are behind expansion moves. That is beyond dispute.

I also understand that most states are bankrupt and that impacts state supported schools.

That said, I still don't think the networks are going to get their way completely and/or that enough schools, particularly the key ones (Texas, North Carolina, ND) are going to make the radical moves required to fulfil this vision.

That said, I will stop polluting your board with my stubborn, anachronistic viewpoints. Take care, JR.

Terry, I wish we had more differing discussion on this board and you are certainly not polluting it. JayhawkMVP, BewarethePhog, XLance, Ohio1317, and He1nous all feel welcomed here and they certainly don't all agree. I had always hoped that there would be rancor-less exchange of ideas on the CS&CR board, but there isn't and these days it is far from it. What you believe is part of who you are and both you and your ideas are always welcome here no matter how contrary they may seem because you can't have a discussion when everyone agrees and because you are always informed and civil. Come back anytime and disagree all you want. JR