(12-27-2014 08:01 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:14 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:07 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Winner- P5 schools
Loser- G5 schools and college football fans.

I get that it is all about money, but it still sucks.

In a nutshell...it killed rivalries like Texas - Texas A&M, Nebraska - Oklahoma and Pitt - WVU...

The rivalry between Texas - Texas A&M, or Pitt - WV is still alive. Its just not being contested on the field anymore. But is being fought in the form of who made the right choice in conference realignment. This is the ultimate battle that determines the real winner.

If that's the case, then Texas A&M and Pitt have already won. It will become even more clear in the not to distant future.

(12-27-2014 10:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 10:48 AM)AntiG Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 10:31 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 10:09 AM)AntiG Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 09:56 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  The Sun Belt actually took 4 from the WAC so the part about them not adding from other FBS conferences is not true. (Idaho, New Mexico St, Texas St and Texas-Arlington all were WAC members)

I'll also say that the the American is the most unstable of the FBS conferences at this point as they would be the most likely raid target from above should the Big 12 decide to expand and should they lose any two of Cincinnati, UCF, UConn or Memphis they may be permanently relegated behind the MWC or CUSA.

Not really, its more of a domino effect. AAC loses two teams to the B12, they'll just end up poaching two to four from CUSA or MAC to make up for it.

Adding say, a mix of Marshall, NIU, Buffalo, La Tech, Rice, ODU, WKU, Ohio, etc and suddenly the CUSA is back to poaching the Sunbelt again.

The optimum number of teams for a G5 conference is 12 based on the CFP money distribution. So CUSA may stay put if they lose 1 team but you are correct should they lose 2 they probably would raid the Sun Belt or add an FCS team to bring the number back up to 12. My point wasn't that the AAC would not raid another conference to replace teams but that doing so would make it that much harder from them to consistently finish as the top G5 conference which is what they desperately want to do.

Yes, I got what you were saying, but my point was that if they lose teams they will poach CUSA and MAC, therefore weakening those conferences as well. While possibly they will drop in ability to compete against the MWC (which really only has 3 solid programs and 1 strong one so they aren't particularly impressive either), the AAC will still end up separating themselves from the third tier FBS conferences (CUSA, Sunbelt and MAC) because they poach their best programs away. Its the way the old Big East had always survived poachings.

Yes, a Big 12 raid on the AAC will surely weaken the AAC, but not relative to CUSA, MAC, or Sun Belt, as the AAC will just backfill from them, weakening them in the process.

A lot more parity in the SBC & CUSA although the MAC could take a hit with the loss of a couple of top programs.

(12-27-2014 12:39 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 08:01 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:14 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:07 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Winner- P5 schools
Loser- G5 schools and college football fans.

I get that it is all about money, but it still sucks.

In a nutshell...it killed rivalries like Texas - Texas A&M, Nebraska - Oklahoma and Pitt - WVU...

The rivalry between Texas - Texas A&M, or Pitt - WV is still alive. Its just not being contested on the field anymore. But is being fought in the form of who made the right choice in conference realignment. This is the ultimate battle that determines the real winner.

If that's the case, then Texas A&M and Pitt have already won. It will become even more clear in the not to distant future.

Texas and Texas A/M isn't really a "rivalry" in the sense that they are battling for supremacy. It's a big brother/little brother dynamic, like Florida vs FSU. No matter how strong the SEC is, and no matter what happens to the Big 12, and no matter whose teams are better in any given year or period of years, Texas will always be the #1 university in the state of Texas.

Pitt and WVU is a bit different, and IMO the jury is out. Structurally, within the P5, the Big 12 has a formally stronger position than the ACC. It makes more money than the ACC in every way - from the CFP, and from media deals, both overall and on a per-school basis. Yet some seem to question if it can last as a 10-team league. So that's more up in the air, and unlike Texas/TAMU, it is a battle for supremacy within that region of the country, even though academically, WVU will never match Pitt.

(12-27-2014 12:39 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 08:01 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:14 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:07 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Winner- P5 schools
Loser- G5 schools and college football fans.

I get that it is all about money, but it still sucks.

In a nutshell...it killed rivalries like Texas - Texas A&M, Nebraska - Oklahoma and Pitt - WVU...

The rivalry between Texas - Texas A&M, or Pitt - WV is still alive. Its just not being contested on the field anymore. But is being fought in the form of who made the right choice in conference realignment. This is the ultimate battle that determines the real winner.

If that's the case, then Texas A&M and Pitt have already won. It will become even more clear in the not to distant future.

Excuse me?

http://joeweasel.wordpress.com/2014/12/2...r-shut-up/

Until Pitt starts filling their stadium, and boosters start donating funds, they haven't won anything. Firing Pederson and hiring Narduzzi could be the first step in that direction. But without fan support Pitt football is merely hanging on for dear life as they continue to lose money on the program.

I'll agree with you about A&M, at the moment. Giving kids in Texas an alternative conference choice has worked out great for them so far. But the true test of who won and who lost won't be known for a few years. Short term vision is extremely spurious when viewed via the long term retrospective..

If the AAC gets "poached" they indeed will go after CUSA and possibly the the MAC to fill.
However, if the American losses include any combination of UConn, Memphis and/or Cincy, the AAC is still the big loser.
Think about, remembering that this is not just about football, but MBB and television footprint and market as well as brand recognition.

There are no current CUSA, SBC or MAC programs that can replace those three using all of the above criteria; at least in the short term.

Marshall has football, but is lacking market and mbb. UNCC and ODU have the markets and to some degree basketball pedigree but otherwise little else to compare to Memphis, Cincy, and UConn in all categories.
Ga State has the prize market but little else.
UTSA and UTEP have markets and long term potential.
WKU has mbb pedigree, up-and-coming football but no market.
MTSU has potential and a large market, but no real name recognition.
USM has pedigree and brand recognition, but a small market and current turmoil.

There are some MAC schools with potential, but no real basketball pedigrees, and the decline of football fanbases in their locations make them a long term liability.

Bottom line, there are some CUSA schools and GaSt that have very good long term potential.
However, losing any combination of two of those schools would not be a major short term blow to CUSA (or the SBC).
But....any loss to the Big XII from the AAC would be devastating, maybe even to the point that it would no longer be attractive enough to make the exit fees, scheduling issues, and non revenue sports compatibility worth the trouble for the aforementioned candidates.

(12-27-2014 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 12:39 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 08:01 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:14 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:07 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Winner- P5 schools
Loser- G5 schools and college football fans.

I get that it is all about money, but it still sucks.

In a nutshell...it killed rivalries like Texas - Texas A&M, Nebraska - Oklahoma and Pitt - WVU...

The rivalry between Texas - Texas A&M, or Pitt - WV is still alive. Its just not being contested on the field anymore. But is being fought in the form of who made the right choice in conference realignment. This is the ultimate battle that determines the real winner.

If that's the case, then Texas A&M and Pitt have already won. It will become even more clear in the not to distant future.

Texas and Texas A/M isn't really a "rivalry" in the sense that they are battling for supremacy. It's a big brother/little brother dynamic, like Florida vs FSU. No matter how strong the SEC is, and no matter what happens to the Big 12, and no matter whose teams are better in any given year or period of years, Texas will always be the #1 university in the state of Texas.

Pitt and WVU is a bit different, and IMO the jury is out. Structurally, within the P5, the Big 12 has a formally stronger position than the ACC. It makes more money than the ACC in every way - from the CFP, and from media deals, both overall and on a per-school basis. Yet some seem to question if it can last as a 10-team league. So that's more up in the air, and unlike Texas/TAMU, it is a battle for supremacy within that region of the country, even though academically, WVU will never match Pitt.

Not really the case with Louisville...even in the Old BIG EAST/American only Texas and Oklahoma outpaced Louisville in terms of generating $$$...with the infusion of ACC $$$ the gap between Louisville and the rest of the Big XII not named Texas or Oklahoma will widen...

Hey, if this is how things are with UT "always on top no matter what" with the ratings, recruits and just plain folks on the street wearing our stuff then I hope UT "stays on top" like this forever!

(12-27-2014 01:40 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Hey, if this is how things are with UT "always on top no matter what" with the ratings, recruits and just plain folks on the street wearing our stuff then I hope UT "stays on top" like this forever!

So you're saying the fact that Texas may end up stealing a couple of A&M's best defensive recruits doesn't matter? This is just an anomaly?

A season or two of success doesn't change over 100 years of history overnight. Short term vision only clouds the issue, 10th. The long term view will prove this out one way or another.

We won 10 of 13 head to head recruit battles this year and if we hadn't fired our DC prematurely to try and get Muschamp, we'd probably have them too.

I agree that short term results don't equal long term futures but this is also the first time ever that the dynamic in the relationship has ever changed and can never be restored to what it was which is good for us.

But the nice thing is, being in seperate conferences means both teams can flourish simar to UF and FSU. I'm just fine with that being the case.

Heck, it would be great to see UT, A&M and TCU forming a core of teams regularly competing for the title like UF/FSU/Miami back in the day.

(12-27-2014 01:36 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 12:39 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 08:01 AM)goofus Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 10:14 PM)Maize Wrote:  In a nutshell...it killed rivalries like Texas - Texas A&M, Nebraska - Oklahoma and Pitt - WVU...

The rivalry between Texas - Texas A&M, or Pitt - WV is still alive. Its just not being contested on the field anymore. But is being fought in the form of who made the right choice in conference realignment. This is the ultimate battle that determines the real winner.

If that's the case, then Texas A&M and Pitt have already won. It will become even more clear in the not to distant future.

Texas and Texas A/M isn't really a "rivalry" in the sense that they are battling for supremacy. It's a big brother/little brother dynamic, like Florida vs FSU. No matter how strong the SEC is, and no matter what happens to the Big 12, and no matter whose teams are better in any given year or period of years, Texas will always be the #1 university in the state of Texas.

Pitt and WVU is a bit different, and IMO the jury is out. Structurally, within the P5, the Big 12 has a formally stronger position than the ACC. It makes more money than the ACC in every way - from the CFP, and from media deals, both overall and on a per-school basis. Yet some seem to question if it can last as a 10-team league. So that's more up in the air, and unlike Texas/TAMU, it is a battle for supremacy within that region of the country, even though academically, WVU will never match Pitt.

Not really the case with Louisville...even in the Old BIG EAST/American only Texas and Oklahoma outpaced Louisville in terms of generating $$$...with the infusion of ACC $$$ the gap between Louisville and the rest of the Big XII not named Texas or Oklahoma will widen...

UofL, thanks to the sweetheart YUM Center deal and great fan support, is certainly in great $$$$ shape athletically.

(12-27-2014 02:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We won 10 of 13 head to head recruit battles this year and if we hadn't fired our DC prematurely to try and get Muschamp, we'd probably have them too.

I agree that short term results don't equal long term futures but this is also the first time ever that the dynamic in the relationship has ever changed and can never be restored to what it was which is good for us.

But the nice thing is, being in seperate conferences means both teams can flourish simar to UF and FSU. I'm just fine with that being the case.

Heck, it would be great to see UT, A&M and TCU forming a core of teams regularly competing for the title like UF/FSU/Miami back in the day.

Oh, I fully agree with you that A&M is in a better place out from under the thumb of Texas. But only time will tell the whole story.

(12-26-2014 01:40 PM)goofus Wrote:  Ok, based on some good feedback in this thread, I am proposing to tweak my formula a little.

Ok here are the new rules

Conference gains an all sports member = +1pts.
Gains non-football member or football only member = +0.5

conference loses all sports member = -2pts.
loses non-football member or football only member = -1

Conference loses a CCG = -1pts
Conference gains a CCG = +1pts

1. BigTen = +4
2. PAC = +3
3. SEC = +2
4. ACC = +1.5
5. MAC = -1.5
6. MWC = -1.5
7. SBC = -3.5
8. Big 12 = -7
9. CUSA = -7
10. AAC = -10.5
11. WAC = -17

This makes more sense than the OP, but it still misses the mark, IMHO.

The old Big East essentially split into two successor-leagues, so it is wrong to compare the AAC of 2015 with any league of 2009.

Biggest losers: UConn, USF & U Cincinnati. From the Big East and fat checks to the aac and small checks.

(12-27-2014 09:41 PM)TyBull Wrote:  Biggest losers: UConn, USF & U Cincinnati. From the Big East and fat checks to the aac and small checks.

Yup...everyone else in the AAC, MWC, Sunbelt, MAC and C-USA all got more $$$...not even mentioning the rest of the P5...

(12-26-2014 01:40 PM)goofus Wrote:  Ok, based on some good feedback in this thread, I am proposing to tweak my formula a little.

Ok here are the new rules

Conference gains an all sports member = +1pts.
Gains non-football member or football only member = +0.5

conference loses all sports member = -2pts.
loses non-football member or football only member = -1

Conference loses a CCG = -1pts
Conference gains a CCG = +1pts

1. BigTen = +4
2. PAC = +3
3. SEC = +2
4. ACC = +1.5
5. MAC = -1.5
6. MWC = -1.5
7. SBC = -3.5
8. Big 12 = -7
9. CUSA = -7
10. AAC = -10.5
11. WAC = -17

B1G should be +4.5 since they added powerhouse Hopkins in LAX

(12-27-2014 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

maize Wrote:Not really the case with Louisville...even in the Old BIG EAST/American only Texas and Oklahoma outpaced Louisville in terms of generating $$$...with the infusion of ACC $$$ the gap between Louisville and the rest of the Big XII not named Texas or Oklahoma will widen...

UofL, thanks to the sweetheart YUM Center deal and great fan support, is certainly in great $$$$ shape athletically.

Please stop attempting to speak on things you don't know. Louisville's "sweetheart" Deal with the KFF Yum center calls for them to pay more money for 22 games to the city that ANY professional team in any sport but one pays to theor city for their venue. Without exception (aside from the Houston Rockets). If that is a "sweetheart"
Deal, than it makes it at beat the 121st best deal in the country.

Oh and for the record, they still ranked in about the same spot before YUM was in the oxiture, still number one in basketball revenue, the only difference being the "profit" for basketball ranked second compared to every other teams' "revenue,"
And overall income being top 30 instead of top 20.

(12-27-2014 09:46 PM)AntiG Wrote:  

(12-26-2014 01:40 PM)goofus Wrote:  Ok, based on some good feedback in this thread, I am proposing to tweak my formula a little.

Ok here are the new rules

Conference gains an all sports member = +1pts.
Gains non-football member or football only member = +0.5

conference loses all sports member = -2pts.
loses non-football member or football only member = -1

Conference loses a CCG = -1pts
Conference gains a CCG = +1pts

1. BigTen = +4
2. PAC = +3
3. SEC = +2
4. ACC = +1.5
5. MAC = -1.5
6. MWC = -1.5
7. SBC = -3.5
8. Big 12 = -7
9. CUSA = -7
10. AAC = -10.5
11. WAC = -17

B1G should be +4.5 since they added powerhouse Hopkins in LAX

LOL, then shouldn't the ACC get credit for adding the biggest powerhouse in lacrosse in Syracuse

(12-27-2014 09:41 PM)TyBull Wrote:  Biggest losers: UConn, USF & U Cincinnati. From the Big East and fat checks to the aac and small checks.

Yes they certainly got the shortest ends of the stick

(12-27-2014 03:03 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 02:08 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  We won 10 of 13 head to head recruit battles this year and if we hadn't fired our DC prematurely to try and get Muschamp, we'd probably have them too.

I agree that short term results don't equal long term futures but this is also the first time ever that the dynamic in the relationship has ever changed and can never be restored to what it was which is good for us.

But the nice thing is, being in seperate conferences means both teams can flourish simar to UF and FSU. I'm just fine with that being the case.

Heck, it would be great to see UT, A&M and TCU forming a core of teams regularly competing for the title like UF/FSU/Miami back in the day.

Oh, I fully agree with you that A&M is in a better place out from under the thumb of Texas. But only time will tell the whole story.

Just curious why Texas Tech is left out of this equation? I honestly believe we are a few defensive players away from doing some real damage in the Big 12.

It wasn't that long ago when we were the 2nd best team in Texas under Leach.

(12-27-2014 10:01 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-27-2014 12:47 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

maize Wrote:Not really the case with Louisville...even in the Old BIG EAST/American only Texas and Oklahoma outpaced Louisville in terms of generating $$$...with the infusion of ACC $$$ the gap between Louisville and the rest of the Big XII not named Texas or Oklahoma will widen...

UofL, thanks to the sweetheart YUM Center deal and great fan support, is certainly in great $$$$ shape athletically.

Please stop attempting to speak on things you don't know. Louisville's "sweetheart" Deal with the KFF Yum center calls for them to pay more money for 22 games to the city that ANY professional team in any sport but one pays to theor city for their venue. Without exception (aside from the Houston Rockets). If that is a "sweetheart"
Deal, than it makes it at beat the 121st best deal in the country.

Oh and for the record, they still ranked in about the same spot before YUM was in the oxiture, still number one in basketball revenue, the only difference being the "profit" for basketball ranked second compared to every other teams' "revenue,"
And overall income being top 30 instead of top 20.

As a Program the Louisville Brand is at a All Time High...watching that All State Commerical on ESPN and love the Fact when it being basically a College Football Ad the 1st school you see is the Father/Son doing the C-A-R-D-S Cheer followed by Oklahoma, LSU, Texas...

Currently in the Top 20 without the ACC Revenue...the point being Louisville currently in this new era will have the funds to compete...