Three models of a 4 x 18 assuming that an upper tier could expand with some schools most likely to want to move up. Theoretical Rules: Every P conference has to take at least 1 G5 school and no more than 2 G5 schools. All 65 current P5 schools will be accounted for and there will be no partial memberships.
_________________________________________________________________________


Big 12 is Absorbed Scenario:


PAC:
Brigham Young, Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U.

Arizona, Arizona State, California, Los Angeles, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Utah

California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State


SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, South Florida, Vanderbilt

East Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


ACC:
Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Central Florida, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane


Big 10:
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Cincinnati, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
____________________________________________________________________



ACC is Absorbed Scenario:


PAC 18:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Utah

Colorado, Brigham Young, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech


SEC:
Duke, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia

Alabama, Auburn, Central Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi State, Tennessee

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, South Florida, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt


Big 10:
Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, N.C. State, Rutgers, Virginia Tech

Cincinnati, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin


Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma

Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Houston, Texas, Tulane


Neither are horrible but clearly with either model one of the two coasts is left weaker than SEC or Big 10 but it starts that way in either case.


______________________________________________________________________

PAC 12 is absorbed scenario:


Big 12:
Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon State, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Washington State

Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


Big 10:
California, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Stanford, Oregon, Washington

Cincinnati, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue


ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Rutgers, West Virginia

Duke, Louisville, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Central Florida, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Tulane, Wake Forest


SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina State, South Carolina, Tennessee

Alabama, Auburn, Miami, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Houston, Louisiana State, Missouri, South Florida, Texas A&M


I kind of like this one because I believe it leads to more natural alignments even with a bifurcated PAC 12. I think these 4 would be more balanced and that the Big 10 gets stronger, the Big 12 gets stronger, the ACC gets stronger and the SEC spreads out a tad and consolidates some market presence in Florida and Texas while getting into North Carolina.

I can't help but think that a main driver of the idea of a 72 team upper tier in the FBS is that if Notre Dame is to be included that means there are 65 P5 schools that need to have a conference home in the upper tier. That's clearly one too many to simply have 4X16 in the upper tier. I struggle with needing to promote seven G5 schools just to force Notre Dame into giving up its independence kicking and screaming.

To avoid adding 7 schools that we didn't previously think belonged, must we pick a sacrificial lamb to be involuntarily culled from the top tier? What if we could get someone to leave voluntarily, by giving them an offer they can't refuse?

What if the 64 were to make this proposal to Boston College? Rejoin the Big East, bringing that conference to 12 members, and join the AAC for football only bringing them back to 12 (11 for basketball). That should give the Eagles media revenue of about $15 million a year.

In addition to that, each of the 64 upper tier schools would contribute $500K a year from their media revenues to induce BC to accept this deal, giving them $47 million in media revenue, plus BE tournament revenue and AAC bowl revenue. They could never get close to that in the current ACC configuration.

To sweeten the deal further, get Syracuse and Pitt to agree to play them each year in football, and Notre Dame to play them twice every four years (one home, once away).

Now we can carve up the Big 12 rationally to get us to 4X16, which I will do in a separate post, in a way that will make all 16 schools more money even after giving BC their $500K cut.

Stealing ideas shamelessly from JRsec, these would be two of my 16 team conferences. They would both be in two divisions of 8 teams each, with only the 7 division games counting toward the division championship.

All 64 teams in the upper tier would have two requirements: they must play at least nine games every year against other P4 teams, and not count any FCS opponents toward bowl eligibility. Beyond that, while they are encouraged to play teams from the other division in their conference as OOC games, they are not required to do so.

These are my recommended divisions of the SEC and ACC, with suggested OOC opponents for each school in parentheses):

SEC East:
Georgia (Georgia Tech, Auburn)
Florida (Florida State, LSU)
South Carolina (Clemson, Mississippi St, North Carolina)
Virginia Tech (Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech)
Tennessee (Alabama, Ole Miss, Clemson)
NC State (North Carolina, Wake Forest, Virginia)
Kentucky (Louisville, West Virginia, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Arkansas, Wake Forest, Duke)

SEC West:
Alabama (Tennessee, Miami)
LSU (Florida, Oklahoma State)
Auburn (Georgia, Florida State)
Texas A&M (Texas, Oklahoma)
Mississippi St (South Carolina, Florida State)
Missouri (Kansas, Kansas State, Illinois)
Ole Miss (Tennessee, Oklahoma, Memphis)
Arkansas (Vanderbilt, Kentucky)

***************************************************************

ACC East:
Clemson (South Carolina, Tennessee)
Florida State (Florida, Auburn)
Miami (Oklahoma, Alabama, UCF/USF)
Georgia Tech (Georgia, Virginia Tech)
North Carolina (NC State, Virginia Tech, South Carolina)
Duke (Northwestern, Vanderbilt)
Virginia (Virginia Tech, NC State, Louisville)
Wake Forest (Vanderbilt, NC State, Syracuse)

ACC West:
Oklahoma (Miami, Texas A&M, Ole Miss)
Oklahoma State (Texas Tech, TCU, LSU)
Notre Dame (Stanford, Southern Cal, Boston College, Navy)
Texas (Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor)
West Virginia (Maryland, Kentucky)
Louisville (Kentucky, Virginia)
Pitt (Penn State, Georgia Tech, Boston College)
Syracuse (Rutgers, Wake Forest, Boston College)

I assume that of the remaining Big 12 schools, the B1G as the alpha dog remaining, would opt to add AAU schools Kansas and Iowa State, leaving the PAC 12 to get to 16 by reluctantly accepting Texas Tech, Kansas State, TCU and Baylor.

Kansas and Iowa State would go to the B1G West division, moving Purdue to the B1G East. Most of their required P4 OOC opponents would be cross division games within the B1G.

I would set up the PAC in a zipper arrangement to give the eastern teams access to both Los Angeles and the Bay Area. These would be my divisions, with suggested OOC opponents in parentheses):

Oregon (Oregon State, Cal, Washington)
Stanford (Cal, Southern Cal, Notre Dame)
Washington State (Washington, Oregon State)
UCLA (Southern Cal, Cal, Washington)
Arizona State (Arizona, Utah)
Colorado (Utah, Arizona)
Kansas State (TCU, Kansas, Missouri)
Texas Tech (Baylor, Texas, Oklahoma State)

TCU (Kansas State, Oklahoma State)
Washington (Washington State, UCLA, Oregon)
Southern Cal (UCLA, Stanford, Notre Dame)
Baylor (Texas Tech, Texas)
Utah (Colorado, Arizona State, BYU)
Arizona (Arizona State, Colorado)
Cal (Stanford, UCLA, Oregon)
Oregon State (Oregon, Washington State)

My post season tournament would include the top two finishers (based on W-L records) from each of the eight divisions, with the first round played on Thanksgiving weekend (Fri and Sat) hosted by the 8 division champions. SEC West champ hosts ACC West #2, SEC East champ hosts ACC East #2, etc. The Quarterfinal round is played the following week at neutral sites. The semifinals are played at the Rose Bowl (PAC vs B1G) and Sugar Bowl (SEC vs ACC) on New Year's Day.

(04-30-2021 05:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Three models of a 4 x 18 assuming that an upper tier could expand with some schools most likely to want to move up. Theoretical Rules: Every P conference has to take at least 1 G5 school and no more than 2 G5 schools. All 65 current P5 schools will be accounted for and there will be no partial memberships.
_________________________________________________________________________


Big 12 is Absorbed Scenario:


PAC:
Brigham Young, Colorado, Kansas State, Texas, Texas Tech, T.C.U.

Arizona, Arizona State, California, Los Angeles, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Utah

California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State


SEC:
Arkansas, Baylor, Louisiana State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, South Florida, Vanderbilt

East Carolina, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee


ACC:
Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Central Florida, Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, Tulane


Big 10:
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Cincinnati, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
____________________________________________________________________



ACC is Absorbed Scenario:


PAC 18:
California, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State

Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Utah

Colorado, Brigham Young, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Christian, Texas Tech


SEC:
Duke, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia

Alabama, Auburn, Central Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi State, Tennessee

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, South Florida, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt


Big 10:
Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, N.C. State, Rutgers, Virginia Tech

Cincinnati, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin


Big 12:
Iowa State, Kansas, Louisville, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma

Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Baylor, Clemson, Florida State, Houston, Texas, Tulane


Neither are horrible but clearly with either model one of the two coasts is left weaker than SEC or Big 10 but it starts that way in either case.


______________________________________________________________________

PAC 12 is absorbed scenario:


Big 12:
Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon State, San Diego State, Southern Cal, Washington State

Baylor, Brigham Young, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech, Utah

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State


Big 10:
California, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Stanford, Oregon, Washington

Cincinnati, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue


ACC:
Boston College, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh Syracuse, Rutgers, West Virginia

Duke, Louisville, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Clemson, Central Florida, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Tulane, Wake Forest


SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina State, South Carolina, Tennessee

Alabama, Auburn, Miami, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, Houston, Louisiana State, Missouri, South Florida, Texas A&M


I kind of like this one because I believe it leads to more natural alignments even with a bifurcated PAC 12. I think these 4 would be more balanced and that the Big 10 gets stronger, the Big 12 gets stronger, the ACC gets stronger and the SEC spreads out a tad and consolidates some market presence in Florida and Texas while getting into North Carolina.

Of the 4X18's I agree with absorbing the PAC.

(05-03-2021 12:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  Stealing ideas shamelessly from JRsec, these would be two of my 16 team conferences. They would both be in two divisions of 8 teams each, with only the 7 division games counting toward the division championship.

All 64 teams in the upper tier would have two requirements: they must play at least nine games every year against other P4 teams, and not count any FCS opponents toward bowl eligibility. Beyond that, while they are encouraged to play teams from the other division in their conference as OOC games, they are not required to do so.

These are my recommended divisions of the SEC and ACC, with suggested OOC opponents for each school in parentheses):

SEC East:
Georgia (Georgia Tech, Auburn)
Florida (Florida State, LSU)
South Carolina (Clemson, Mississippi St, North Carolina)
Virginia Tech (Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech)
Tennessee (Alabama, Ole Miss, Clemson)
NC State (North Carolina, Wake Forest, Virginia)
Kentucky (Louisville, West Virginia, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Arkansas, Wake Forest, Duke)

SEC West:
Alabama (Tennessee, Miami)
LSU (Florida, Oklahoma State)
Auburn (Georgia, Florida State)
Texas A&M (Texas, Oklahoma)
Mississippi St (South Carolina, Florida State)
Missouri (Kansas, Kansas State, Illinois)
Ole Miss (Tennessee, Oklahoma, Memphis)
Arkansas (Vanderbilt, Kentucky)

***************************************************************

ACC East:
Clemson (South Carolina, Tennessee)
Florida State (Florida, Auburn)
Miami (Oklahoma, Alabama, UCF/USF)
Georgia Tech (Georgia, Virginia Tech)
North Carolina (NC State, Virginia Tech, South Carolina)
Duke (Northwestern, Vanderbilt)
Virginia (Virginia Tech, NC State, Louisville)
Wake Forest (Vanderbilt, NC State, Syracuse)

ACC West:
Oklahoma (Miami, Texas A&M, Ole Miss)
Oklahoma State (Texas Tech, TCU, LSU)
Notre Dame (Stanford, Southern Cal, Boston College, Navy)
Texas (Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor)
West Virginia (Maryland, Kentucky)
Louisville (Kentucky, Virginia)
Pitt (Penn State, Georgia Tech, Boston College)
Syracuse (Rutgers, Wake Forest, Boston College)

I really do believe that something like this is the only way for the ACC to close the revenue gap. There is an easier way however from a previous post to take care of B.C.. Everyone leaving the ACC could give them half of the exit fee per school and ESPN can pay their current contract until 2036. Then there is no blowback from the other P4 schools not associated with the ACC (which I think is the weakest part of that particular concept). I will say while I defer to your decision to keep Wake instead of B.C. I am curious as to your reasoning because on the surface B.C. appears to be a bit more valuable. Also by not placing Miami in the division with the B12 and OBE schools you cut Texas off from access to Florida. I think all of those schools would be happier with trips to Miami.

And on a personal note, Georgia Tech / Auburn was the oldest rivalry in the South until it ended in 1978. There still resides on both sides a lot of desire to have that history back. They are only 90 miles apart roughly. You could add that to the crossover games.

And actually the driver behind the 72 concept was merely keeping the 65 and eliminating any with legitimate gripes against an upper tier monopoly purely based on their levels of investment coming close to those of the lowest 5 in the P5.

(05-03-2021 12:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-03-2021 12:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  Stealing ideas shamelessly from JRsec, these would be two of my 16 team conferences. They would both be in two divisions of 8 teams each, with only the 7 division games counting toward the division championship.

All 64 teams in the upper tier would have two requirements: they must play at least nine games every year against other P4 teams, and not count any FCS opponents toward bowl eligibility. Beyond that, while they are encouraged to play teams from the other division in their conference as OOC games, they are not required to do so.

These are my recommended divisions of the SEC and ACC, with suggested OOC opponents for each school in parentheses):

SEC East:
Georgia (Georgia Tech, Auburn)
Florida (Florida State, LSU)
South Carolina (Clemson, Mississippi St, North Carolina)
Virginia Tech (Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech)
Tennessee (Alabama, Ole Miss, Clemson)
NC State (North Carolina, Wake Forest, Virginia)
Kentucky (Louisville, West Virginia, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Arkansas, Wake Forest, Duke)

SEC West:
Alabama (Tennessee, Miami)
LSU (Florida, Oklahoma State)
Auburn (Georgia, Florida State)
Texas A&M (Texas, Oklahoma)
Mississippi St (South Carolina, Florida State)
Missouri (Kansas, Kansas State, Illinois)
Ole Miss (Tennessee, Oklahoma, Memphis)
Arkansas (Vanderbilt, Kentucky)

***************************************************************

ACC East:
Clemson (South Carolina, Tennessee)
Florida State (Florida, Auburn)
Miami (Oklahoma, Alabama, UCF/USF)
Georgia Tech (Georgia, Virginia Tech)
North Carolina (NC State, Virginia Tech, South Carolina)
Duke (Northwestern, Vanderbilt)
Virginia (Virginia Tech, NC State, Louisville)
Wake Forest (Vanderbilt, NC State, Syracuse)

ACC West:
Oklahoma (Miami, Texas A&M, Ole Miss)
Oklahoma State (Texas Tech, TCU, LSU)
Notre Dame (Stanford, Southern Cal, Boston College, Navy)
Texas (Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor)
West Virginia (Maryland, Kentucky)
Louisville (Kentucky, Virginia)
Pitt (Penn State, Georgia Tech, Boston College)
Syracuse (Rutgers, Wake Forest, Boston College)

I really do believe that something like this is the only way for the ACC to close the revenue gap. There is an easier way however from a previous post to take care of B.C.. Everyone leaving the ACC could give them half of the exit fee per school and ESPN can pay their current contract until 2036. Then there is no blowback from the other P4 schools not associated with the ACC (which I think is the weakest part of that particular concept). I will say while I defer to your decision to keep Wake instead of B.C. I am curious as to your reasoning because on the surface B.C. appears to be a bit more valuable. Also by not placing Miami in the division with the B12 and OBE schools you cut Texas off from access to Florida. I think all of those schools would be happier with trips to Miami.

And on a personal note, Georgia Tech / Auburn was the oldest rivalry in the South until it ended in 1978. There still resides on both sides a lot of desire to have that history back. They are only 90 miles apart roughly. You could add that to the crossover games.

And actually the driver behind the 72 concept was merely keeping the 65 and eliminating any with legitimate gripes against an upper tier monopoly purely based on their levels of investment coming close to those of the lowest 5 in the P5.

As I went through the process of looking at OOC matchups, I was struck by the number of games that would be attractive enough to media partners to give everybody a nice bump in income. That list, as you point out with Auburn and Georgia Tech, need not be all inclusive.

My reasoning re BC vs Wake - and those were the two "finalists" as it were - was that BC had more attractive options to fall back on with the BE and AAC. Wake could also do that, but would be less attractive to those two conferences.

(05-03-2021 01:20 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-03-2021 12:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-03-2021 12:06 PM)ken d Wrote:  Stealing ideas shamelessly from JRsec, these would be two of my 16 team conferences. They would both be in two divisions of 8 teams each, with only the 7 division games counting toward the division championship.

All 64 teams in the upper tier would have two requirements: they must play at least nine games every year against other P4 teams, and not count any FCS opponents toward bowl eligibility. Beyond that, while they are encouraged to play teams from the other division in their conference as OOC games, they are not required to do so.

These are my recommended divisions of the SEC and ACC, with suggested OOC opponents for each school in parentheses):

SEC East:
Georgia (Georgia Tech, Auburn)
Florida (Florida State, LSU)
South Carolina (Clemson, Mississippi St, North Carolina)
Virginia Tech (Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech)
Tennessee (Alabama, Ole Miss, Clemson)
NC State (North Carolina, Wake Forest, Virginia)
Kentucky (Louisville, West Virginia, Arkansas)
Vanderbilt (Arkansas, Wake Forest, Duke)

SEC West:
Alabama (Tennessee, Miami)
LSU (Florida, Oklahoma State)
Auburn (Georgia, Florida State)
Texas A&M (Texas, Oklahoma)
Mississippi St (South Carolina, Florida State)
Missouri (Kansas, Kansas State, Illinois)
Ole Miss (Tennessee, Oklahoma, Memphis)
Arkansas (Vanderbilt, Kentucky)

***************************************************************

ACC East:
Clemson (South Carolina, Tennessee)
Florida State (Florida, Auburn)
Miami (Oklahoma, Alabama, UCF/USF)
Georgia Tech (Georgia, Virginia Tech)
North Carolina (NC State, Virginia Tech, South Carolina)
Duke (Northwestern, Vanderbilt)
Virginia (Virginia Tech, NC State, Louisville)
Wake Forest (Vanderbilt, NC State, Syracuse)

ACC West:
Oklahoma (Miami, Texas A&M, Ole Miss)
Oklahoma State (Texas Tech, TCU, LSU)
Notre Dame (Stanford, Southern Cal, Boston College, Navy)
Texas (Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor)
West Virginia (Maryland, Kentucky)
Louisville (Kentucky, Virginia)
Pitt (Penn State, Georgia Tech, Boston College)
Syracuse (Rutgers, Wake Forest, Boston College)

I really do believe that something like this is the only way for the ACC to close the revenue gap. There is an easier way however from a previous post to take care of B.C.. Everyone leaving the ACC could give them half of the exit fee per school and ESPN can pay their current contract until 2036. Then there is no blowback from the other P4 schools not associated with the ACC (which I think is the weakest part of that particular concept). I will say while I defer to your decision to keep Wake instead of B.C. I am curious as to your reasoning because on the surface B.C. appears to be a bit more valuable. Also by not placing Miami in the division with the B12 and OBE schools you cut Texas off from access to Florida. I think all of those schools would be happier with trips to Miami.

And on a personal note, Georgia Tech / Auburn was the oldest rivalry in the South until it ended in 1978. There still resides on both sides a lot of desire to have that history back. They are only 90 miles apart roughly. You could add that to the crossover games.

And actually the driver behind the 72 concept was merely keeping the 65 and eliminating any with legitimate gripes against an upper tier monopoly purely based on their levels of investment coming close to those of the lowest 5 in the P5.

As I went through the process of looking at OOC matchups, I was struck by the number of games that would be attractive enough to media partners to give everybody a nice bump in income. That list, as you point out with Auburn and Georgia Tech, need not be all inclusive.

My reasoning re BC vs Wake - and those were the two "finalists" as it were - was that BC had more attractive options to fall back on with the BE and AAC. Wake could also do that, but would be less attractive to those two conferences.

This makes sense to me. But let me throw a curve into the discussion. X has always spoken of a Southern Ivy. What if pay for play drives some of our top privates into a more affordable position of having a deemphasized football, or no football, but with money pumped into a much more affordable hoops program.

Imagine if you will Duke, Wake Forest, Boston College, Vanderbilt, Rice, Tulane, Northwestern, possibly SMU, Tulsa, and perhaps even Emory getting on board with this.

When you refigure realignment then it opens up much more profitable possibilities.


Now it's easier to move to a 3 x 20 for the P conferences:

PAC 20:
Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Arizona, Arizona State, California, California Los Angeles, Southern Cal
Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State
Baylor, Colorado, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah

B1G 20:
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Notre Dame, Penn State, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse
Georgia Tech, Maryland, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

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

I'm going to back off my proposal to shed one P5 team to get to a 4X16 model. I'm not inclined to insist on symmetry for the sake of symmetry. But I do think that JRs plan to beef up the ACC and expand the territory of the SEC has a lot of merit. Frankly, with those moves, it really shouldn't matter very much how the other P5 conferences react.

So, here's the ACC, with a 7 game division schedule and a commitment to scheduling 9 P games and no FCS games:

East: Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Duke, Wake Forest and Virginia

West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Notre Dame, Texas, Miami, Pitt, Boston College and Syracuse

***********************************************************

And the SEC becomes:

East: Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Tennessee, NC State, Kentucky and Vanderbilt

West: Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Texas A&M, Mississippi State, Missouri, Ole Miss and Arkansas

**************************************************************

At this point, there are no attractive options left for the B1G and the PAC, so they will want to stand pat. The Big 12, however, is now desperate to retain P status. With the support of the SEC, ACC and ESPN, they rebuild by going big.

West: TCU, Baylor, Boise State, Texas Tech, BYU, Houston, San Diego State and SMU

East: Kansas State, West Virginia, UCF, Iowa State, Cincinnati, Memphis, USF and Kansas

***************************************************************

Now we can address the CFP much more easily. Expand to 8 teams, with the champs of those P5 as AQ in the playoff. The first round is played the first Saturday in December. CCGs are moved up to Thanksgiving weekend so all 9 get a good time slot on TV.

The four highest ranked AQ champs host the 5th AQ plus the three highest ranked teams that did not play in a CCG. The winners advance to the Semifinals at the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl. The other four NY6 games match the eight highest ranked teams not in the semifinals. If a G4 team is ranked high enough, they get invited, and if not they are left out of the NY6.

All these rankings are done by averaging the three middle ranks for each team, using two human polls (AP and Coaches), two computer rankings (Sagarin and one TBD), and a hybrid (the Massey Composite). The selection committee becomes a placement committee to determine the pairings for the NY6 taking geography into account.

In effect, 21 schools will have a path to a national championship (obviously, some easier than others). Those are the 18 schools playing in a CCG, plus three at large teams which did not. Presidents will like the fact that the season is not extended further than it is now, and all bowl selections will have been made well before final exams begin and with plenty of time for fans to make travel plans.

Unfortunately, none of that will ever come to pass, for one simple reason. It would not force Notre Dame to go all in with the ACC, and unless the Irish would be frozen out of any National Championship tournament they will not join a conference for football.

Since clearly Notre Dame has enough clout with the media to prevent that from happening, they will remain independent.

(05-05-2021 06:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  Unfortunately, none of that will ever come to pass, for one simple reason. It would not force Notre Dame to go all in with the ACC, and unless the Irish would be frozen out of any National Championship tournament they will not join a conference for football.

Since clearly Notre Dame has enough clout with the media to prevent that from happening, they will remain independent.

Please forgive the very long post, but I think that I owe Ken D an explanation. He messaged me about ND's possible reaction to his proposed conference and I didn't properly explain my negative reaction to it.

Many ACC fans (and fans in general) thought that once Notre Dame tasted the "good life" of conference football in 2020, that attitudes of ND people in favor of football conference membership would increase and attitudes in favor of football independence would lessen.

It appears from all accounts that the effect was entirely the opposite, that football conference membership in the 2020 season actually hardened attitudes against it and in favor of independence.

That occurred despite ND going undefeated in the regular season, beating #1 Clemson, making it to the ACC Championship Game, making the playoffs and garnering high television ratings.

(I think everyone would agree that was a pretty fair first year as a P5 football conference member for ND)

There was also a "conventional wisdom" among non-ND fans that younger Irish fans would enthusiastically embrace conference membership. That did not happen, either.

Jack Swarbrick even discussed it in an interview:


"Among the fan base, Swarbrick said he hasn’t sensed any groundswell support for a permanent move into the ACC. To the contrary, he said, there seems to be renewed confidence in the program’s championship aspirations as an independent after going 43-6 over the past four seasons.

That includes a CFP semifinal appearance in 2018.

“I don’t sense any change,” Swarbrick said. “I guess the one thing I do sense is that because we played so well over an extended period of time now, I do think there is a view among Notre Dame fans that we can succeed independently and still have a shot at the postseason in the way we want it.”

More from the linked article:


"Notre Dame’s traditional status as a football independent remains as sacrosanct as ever.


“We hope we’ve been a great member of the conference,” Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said this week in a video meeting with reporters. “We’ve certainly enjoyed being a member of the conference and having the opportunities it’s presented. It was a very positive experience.’

And yet, it figures to remain a cameo.

“The things that drive us to independence don’t relate to that,” Swarbrick said. “The reasons that we value independence and it continues to be a priority for us aren’t impacted by the positive experience of being in the ACC fully this year.”




https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeberardi...7a0d04e032


The feeling among ND fans is gratitude for being able to play in the ACC in 2020 and a liberated feeling of relief that now ND can return to independent status in 2021.

Playing 9 ACC schools in football last season (even with ND going 9-0) felt very restrictive and "straightjacketed" for ND fans, too regional and repetitive, almost "incestuous".

That may sound strange to non-ND fans, but after being independent for 133 years, ND and its fans are not "wired" to playing football inside a conference.


ND fans like to "barnstorm" around the country, play some games in NFL stadiums like Lambeau Field or Soldier Field or Fed Ex Field, play Navy in some place like Philly, San Diego or Dublin, Ireland, play a "home game" in a place like San Antonio, play in California every year and play teams from different conferences and different parts of the country.

Schedule Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, Texas A&M and teams like that.

(All on ND's very recent or future schedules)

Variety of that type is part of what being an ND football fan is all about. It is who they are. That is what they want and expect.

That is how Notre Dame became "Notre Dame" in the first place.

(Train trips in the 1920's to New York City to play Army in old Yankee Stadium or to Los Angeles to play USC at the Coliseum)

That is ND's identity, at least to ND fans. They adamantly do not want to give that up. That is the essence of "college football" to them. That is what the term means, not competing for a conference title.

ND is not independent because of "arrogance" or because it is "greedy" (ND loses what, $30 million a year in TV money being indy and not in the Big Ten?).

This is why ND is a football independent and wants to remain that way.

ND is different than most programs in that it doesn't want regional rivals and lessened travel costs. It wants the opposite of that.

(In 2018, ND traveled to California, to New York City and back to California late in the season. That was celebrated, not the opposite. It made the playoffs that year, too)

If you don't believe that, consider that ND's biggest rival and most anticipated game every year is against...The University of Southern California (regardless of rankings or records).

When ND joined the ACC in 2012 and assumed the 5 game ACC scheduling agreement, it dropped annual games against Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue, not USC or Stanford.

ND fans live there, in those places, all over the country. They are not limited to one state, area or region of the country. They want to see ND play live at their local stadium.

Playing 7, 8 or 9 games in a conference is simply not conducive to that. ND has fought being "regionalized" in a conference for the last thirty years.

Since the other major independents caved and joined conferences and everyone else presses ND to do the same, football independence has become a "badge of honor" with ND fans, something to be defended at all costs.

That has solidified into "If ND haters everywhere think conference membership is a good idea for ND, then it definitely must be the opposite".

That is why various proposals or schemes to make conference membership more attractive to ND usually falls on deaf ears.


(ND people would rather make less TV money and have a tougher shot at the playoffs as an independent than join a football conference)

When it comes to that, ND and its fans are a round peg that people keep trying to force into a square hole.

(05-05-2021 07:25 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 06:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  Unfortunately, none of that will ever come to pass, for one simple reason. It would not force Notre Dame to go all in with the ACC, and unless the Irish would be frozen out of any National Championship tournament they will not join a conference for football.

Since clearly Notre Dame has enough clout with the media to prevent that from happening, they will remain independent.

Please forgive the very long post, but I think that I owe Ken D an explanation. He messaged me about ND's possible reaction to his proposed conference and I didn't properly explain my negative reaction to it.

Many ACC fans (and fans in general) thought that once Notre Dame tasted the "good life" of conference football in 2020, that attitudes of ND people in favor of football conference membership would increase and attitudes in favor of football independence would lessen.

It appears from all accounts that the effect was entirely the opposite, that football conference membership in the 2020 season actually hardened attitudes against it and in favor of independence.

That occurred despite ND going undefeated in the regular season, beating #1 Clemson, making it to the ACC Championship Game, making the playoffs and garnering high television ratings.

(I think everyone would agree that was a pretty fair first year as a P5 football conference member for ND)

There was also a "conventional wisdom" among non-ND fans that younger Irish fans would enthusiastically embrace conference membership. That did not happen, either.

Jack Swarbrick even discussed it in an interview:


"Among the fan base, Swarbrick said he hasn’t sensed any groundswell support for a permanent move into the ACC. To the contrary, he said, there seems to be renewed confidence in the program’s championship aspirations as an independent after going 43-6 over the past four seasons.

That includes a CFP semifinal appearance in 2018.

“I don’t sense any change,” Swarbrick said. “I guess the one thing I do sense is that because we played so well over an extended period of time now, I do think there is a view among Notre Dame fans that we can succeed independently and still have a shot at the postseason in the way we want it.”

More from the linked article:


"Notre Dame’s traditional status as a football independent remains as sacrosanct as ever.


“We hope we’ve been a great member of the conference,” Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said this week in a video meeting with reporters. “We’ve certainly enjoyed being a member of the conference and having the opportunities it’s presented. It was a very positive experience.’

And yet, it figures to remain a cameo.

“The things that drive us to independence don’t relate to that,” Swarbrick said. “The reasons that we value independence and it continues to be a priority for us aren’t impacted by the positive experience of being in the ACC fully this year.”




https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeberardi...7a0d04e032


The feeling among ND fans is gratitude for being able to play in the ACC in 2020 and a liberated feeling of relief that now ND can return to independent status in 2021.

Playing 9 ACC schools in football last season (even with ND going 9-0) felt very restrictive and "straightjacketed" for ND fans, too regional and repetitive, almost "incestuous".

That may sound strange to non-ND fans, but after being independent for 133 years, ND and its fans are not "wired" to playing football inside a conference.


ND fans like to "barnstorm" around the country, play some games in NFL stadiums like Lambeau Field or Soldier Field or Fed Ex Field, play Navy in some place like Philly, San Diego or Dublin, Ireland, play a "home game" in a place like San Antonio, play in California every year and play teams from different conferences and different parts of the country.

Schedule Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, Texas A&M and teams like that.

(All on ND's very recent or future schedules)

Variety of that type is part of what being an ND football fan is all about. It is who they are. That is what they want and expect.

That is how Notre Dame became "Notre Dame" in the first place.

(Train trips in the 1920's to New York City to play Army in old Yankee Stadium or to Los Angeles to play USC at the Coliseum)

That is ND's identity, at least to ND fans. They adamantly do not want to give that up. That is the essence of "college football" to them. That is what the term means, not competing for a conference title.

ND is not independent because of "arrogance" or because it is "greedy" (ND loses what, $30 million a year in TV money being indy and not in the Big Ten?).

This is why ND is a football independent and wants to remain that way.

ND is different than most programs in that it doesn't want regional rivals and lessened travel costs. It wants the opposite of that.

(In 2018, ND traveled to California, to New York City and back to California late in the season. That was celebrated, not the opposite. It made the playoffs that year, too)

If you don't believe that, consider that ND's biggest rival and most anticipated game every year is against...The University of Southern California (regardless of rankings or records).

ND fans live there, in those places, all over the country. They are not limited to one state, area or region of the country. They want to see ND play live at their local stadium.

Playing 7, 8 or 9 games in a conference is simply not conducive to that.

That is why various proposals or schemes to make conference membership more attractive to ND usually falls on deaf ears.


(ND people would rather make less TV money and have a tougher shot at the playoffs as an independent than join a football conference)

When it comes to that, ND and its fans are a round peg that people keep trying to force into a square hole.

I don't think I misunderstood you, Terry. Nor do I think Notre Dame deserves to be criticized at all for its stand. I do think that anything short of a four team only CFP with only the champions of a P4 conference being eligible would enable the Irish to maintain its independence. And that's a good thing, IMO. Especially if it drives ESPN to push for an eight team playoff. That could give the P4 champs a guaranteed spot as host of a quarterfinal game against one of the best G6 champion and three at large entries.

(05-05-2021 10:07 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:25 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 06:52 AM)ken d Wrote:  Unfortunately, none of that will ever come to pass, for one simple reason. It would not force Notre Dame to go all in with the ACC, and unless the Irish would be frozen out of any National Championship tournament they will not join a conference for football.

Since clearly Notre Dame has enough clout with the media to prevent that from happening, they will remain independent.

Please forgive the very long post, but I think that I owe Ken D an explanation. He messaged me about ND's possible reaction to his proposed conference and I didn't properly explain my negative reaction to it.

Many ACC fans (and fans in general) thought that once Notre Dame tasted the "good life" of conference football in 2020, that attitudes of ND people in favor of football conference membership would increase and attitudes in favor of football independence would lessen.

It appears from all accounts that the effect was entirely the opposite, that football conference membership in the 2020 season actually hardened attitudes against it and in favor of independence.

That occurred despite ND going undefeated in the regular season, beating #1 Clemson, making it to the ACC Championship Game, making the playoffs and garnering high television ratings.

(I think everyone would agree that was a pretty fair first year as a P5 football conference member for ND)

There was also a "conventional wisdom" among non-ND fans that younger Irish fans would enthusiastically embrace conference membership. That did not happen, either.

Jack Swarbrick even discussed it in an interview:


"Among the fan base, Swarbrick said he hasn’t sensed any groundswell support for a permanent move into the ACC. To the contrary, he said, there seems to be renewed confidence in the program’s championship aspirations as an independent after going 43-6 over the past four seasons.

That includes a CFP semifinal appearance in 2018.

“I don’t sense any change,” Swarbrick said. “I guess the one thing I do sense is that because we played so well over an extended period of time now, I do think there is a view among Notre Dame fans that we can succeed independently and still have a shot at the postseason in the way we want it.”

More from the linked article:


"Notre Dame’s traditional status as a football independent remains as sacrosanct as ever.


“We hope we’ve been a great member of the conference,” Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick said this week in a video meeting with reporters. “We’ve certainly enjoyed being a member of the conference and having the opportunities it’s presented. It was a very positive experience.’

And yet, it figures to remain a cameo.

“The things that drive us to independence don’t relate to that,” Swarbrick said. “The reasons that we value independence and it continues to be a priority for us aren’t impacted by the positive experience of being in the ACC fully this year.”




https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeberardi...7a0d04e032


The feeling among ND fans is gratitude for being able to play in the ACC in 2020 and a liberated feeling of relief that now ND can return to independent status in 2021.

Playing 9 ACC schools in football last season (even with ND going 9-0) felt very restrictive and "straightjacketed" for ND fans, too regional and repetitive, almost "incestuous".

That may sound strange to non-ND fans, but after being independent for 133 years, ND and its fans are not "wired" to playing football inside a conference.


ND fans like to "barnstorm" around the country, play some games in NFL stadiums like Lambeau Field or Soldier Field or Fed Ex Field, play Navy in some place like Philly, San Diego or Dublin, Ireland, play a "home game" in a place like San Antonio, play in California every year and play teams from different conferences and different parts of the country.

Schedule Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Ohio State, Texas A&M and teams like that.

(All on ND's very recent or future schedules)

Variety of that type is part of what being an ND football fan is all about. It is who they are. That is what they want and expect.

That is how Notre Dame became "Notre Dame" in the first place.

(Train trips in the 1920's to New York City to play Army in old Yankee Stadium or to Los Angeles to play USC at the Coliseum)

That is ND's identity, at least to ND fans. They adamantly do not want to give that up. That is the essence of "college football" to them. That is what the term means, not competing for a conference title.

ND is not independent because of "arrogance" or because it is "greedy" (ND loses what, $30 million a year in TV money being indy and not in the Big Ten?).

This is why ND is a football independent and wants to remain that way.

ND is different than most programs in that it doesn't want regional rivals and lessened travel costs. It wants the opposite of that.

(In 2018, ND traveled to California, to New York City and back to California late in the season. That was celebrated, not the opposite. It made the playoffs that year, too)

If you don't believe that, consider that ND's biggest rival and most anticipated game every year is against...The University of Southern California (regardless of rankings or records).

ND fans live there, in those places, all over the country. They are not limited to one state, area or region of the country. They want to see ND play live at their local stadium.

Playing 7, 8 or 9 games in a conference is simply not conducive to that.

That is why various proposals or schemes to make conference membership more attractive to ND usually falls on deaf ears.


(ND people would rather make less TV money and have a tougher shot at the playoffs as an independent than join a football conference)

When it comes to that, ND and its fans are a round peg that people keep trying to force into a square hole.

I don't think I misunderstood you, Terry. Nor do I think Notre Dame deserves to be criticized at all for its stand. I do think that anything short of a four team only CFP with only the champions of a P4 conference being eligible would enable the Irish to maintain its independence. And that's a good thing, IMO. Especially if it drives ESPN to push for an eight team playoff. That could give the P4 champs a guaranteed spot as host of a quarterfinal game against one of the best G6 champion and three at large entries.

There is another undercurrent here regarding ND fans and their beliefs/attitudes.

(as if my post wasn't long enough...)

Since Michigan and the Big Ten (then Western Conference) rejected ND's application, blackballed it and tried to crush it out of existence (which Rockne and ND defeated by being an independent and barnstorming), Irish fans simply distrust all football conferences and think that they would not promote and protect ND football best interests and goals.

We think that the opposite would occur. That is part of the DNA of an ND football fan.

I like "4x18" more as an exercise - as these all are - but it does make you think. There has to be some logical integrity and intellectual honesty behind it. No one is going to reasonably add Middle Tennessee St to the PAC or Wyoming to the SEC. Through these exercises and others' posts, there is always some thread of consistency. Whether that be Virginia Tech to the SEC or the dissolution of the XII. The common themes are what I anticipate to some degree in reality.

Here's a "4x18" which is really a "4x18+2" and dissolves two power conferences and creates a fourth. This would be a "power separation," if you will.

PAC
Central: Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Colorado, Oregon, Oregon St, Utah, Washington, Washington St
West: Arizona, Arizona St, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC
(Maintains the "school pairs" and brings in a solid lineup to the PAC. This conference is probably a dead idea but it could work.)

B1G
East: Duke, Maryland, Michigan St, North Carolina, Penn St, Virginia
North: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Northwestern, Ohio St, Purdue
West: Iowa, Iowa St, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Wisconsin
(Rutgers heads towards a better-suited METRO. Brings in two AAU Midwest schools and three AAU East Coast schools. Ups football, basketball, and academics. Michigan St and Ohio St can be flipped.)

SEC
East: Clemson, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina St, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
South: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee
West: Arkansas, Florida St, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Texas A&M
(Vanderbilt heads towards a better-suited METRO and Missouri heads to the B1G which is probably a better overall fit. ACC additions add more firepower to football and basketball does grow slightly. Geography and having one Florida school in each division was the idea in the split.)

METRO
East: Cincinnati, East Carolina, Louisville, Memphis, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, West Virginia
South: Baylor, Central Florida, Houston, SMU, South Florida, TCU
(Combination of current power schools and call-ups. Most schools are in larger metropolitan areas. Fairly competitive in football and basketball. A bit of a mish-mash but I like the "underdoggedness" of this conference.)

IND: BYU, Notre Dame
(Two independents with national audiences.)

NY6 Tie-Ins*
Rose: B1G vs PAC
Sugar: SEC vs PAC
Orange: B1G vs SEC
Cotton: SEC vs METRO*/AT-LARGE
Fiesta: PAC vs METRO*/AT-LARGE
Peach: B1G vs METRO*/AT-LARGE
* METRO Champion gets autobid on rotation with Cotton, Fiesta, and Peach
(B1G, PAC, SEC each get 3 autobids - 2 "classic" and 1 "modern." METRO gets at least 1 school in each year but could occasionally be a 2 NY6 bid conference.)

I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

(05-05-2021 07:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

Most of my posts on this site and others for years are an attempt to counter misconceptions and just plain wrong statements and beliefs about ND as illustrated by your first line.

ND, like every other school, acts in its own best self interest.

The only difference is for most other schools, that self interest is seen as best advanced by football conference membership.

ND, on the other hand, thinks differently, that its self interests are best served by football independence.

If Alabama or Ohio State thought it in their best interests to leave their conferences and be independent, they would do so.

Think not? There is a groundswell recently about the top draw schools making more money than others in their conference, a more "eat what you kill" attitude.

That idea was seen as heresy by most fans ten or fifteen years ago. Now, with money tight....not so much.

There are valid historical reasons why ND is a football independent, reasons unique to ND.

This is a fact that many fans of other schools tend to not know or ignore in favor of "arrogance" or "greedy" (although that idea has largely died in recent years since every P5 school now makes more TV money than ND).

(05-05-2021 10:57 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

Most of my posts on this site and others for years are an attempt to counter misconceptions and just plain wrong statements and beliefs about ND as illustrated by your first line.

ND, like every other school, acts in its own best self interest.

The only difference is for most other schools, that self interest is seen as best advanced by football conference membership.

ND, on the other hand, thinks differently, that its self interests are best served by football independence.

If Alabama or Ohio State thought it in their best interests to leave their conferences and be independent, they would do so.

Think not? There is a groundswell recently about the top draw schools making more money than others in their conference, a more "eat what you kill" attitude.

That idea was seen as heresy by most fans ten or fifteen years ago. Now, with money tight....not so much.

There are valid historical reasons why ND is a football independent, reasons unique to ND.

This is a fact that many fans of other schools tend to not know or ignore in favor of "arrogance" or "greedy" (although that idea has largely died in recent years since every P5 school now makes more TV money than ND).

I don't fault Notre Dame for their choice of independence in football. That said, their existence as a football independent at an elite level is not without external enabling. It is fair to say Notre Dame has commanded that by history, tradition, popularity, skillful negotiating, and savvy decision-making.
The old Big East, The Big Ten, Southern Cal, Stanford, NBC, the ACC, the former BCS and current P5 governance structures including all the major commissioners, etc., have all enabled Notre Dame's independence in football. When Notre Dame sits at the table with the commissioners of the BIG, SEC, ACC, B12, and PAC 12, with an equivalent vote and being an equal decider, that's quite accommodating. Notre Dame is not representing independents beyond themselves.

(05-11-2021 12:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 10:57 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

Most of my posts on this site and others for years are an attempt to counter misconceptions and just plain wrong statements and beliefs about ND as illustrated by your first line.

ND, like every other school, acts in its own best self interest.

The only difference is for most other schools, that self interest is seen as best advanced by football conference membership.

ND, on the other hand, thinks differently, that its self interests are best served by football independence.

If Alabama or Ohio State thought it in their best interests to leave their conferences and be independent, they would do so.

Think not? There is a groundswell recently about the top draw schools making more money than others in their conference, a more "eat what you kill" attitude.

That idea was seen as heresy by most fans ten or fifteen years ago. Now, with money tight....not so much.

There are valid historical reasons why ND is a football independent, reasons unique to ND.

This is a fact that many fans of other schools tend to not know or ignore in favor of "arrogance" or "greedy" (although that idea has largely died in recent years since every P5 school now makes more TV money than ND).

I don't fault Notre Dame for their choice of independence in football. That said, their existence as a football independent at an elite level is not without external enabling. It is fair to say Notre Dame has commanded that by history, tradition, popularity, skillful negotiating, and savvy decision-making.
The old Big East, The Big Ten, Southern Cal, Stanford, NBC, the ACC, the former BCS and current P5 governance structures including all the major commissioners, etc., have all enabled Notre Dame's independence in football. When Notre Dame sits at the table with the commissioners of the BIG, SEC, ACC, B12, and PAC 12, with an equivalent vote and being an equal decider, that's quite accommodating. Notre Dame is not representing independents beyond themselves.

All true.

ND would hot be where it is and wield the power it does if all of the power brokers did not want it to be so.

That is real power, is it not, to have all others with power want you to have power?

ND has never claimed to represent any other football independents.

That is their job.

(05-12-2021 08:31 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-11-2021 12:03 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 10:57 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(05-05-2021 07:01 PM)ken d Wrote:  I imagine there are many college football fans who view Notre Dame's preference for independence as evidence of selfishness, and not in the best interests of the sport. But Michigan's motives for being in a conference - the Big Ten - or Alabama's for being in the SEC shouldn't be considered altruistic. They made their decision initially, and continue to affirm it today, because it serves their selfish interests. And their success over the years validates that theirs were good decisions.

I'm not at all sure that either of those schools would have had as much success until now had they chosen independence, and I doubt they would continue to have that success if they tried to operate as a football independent in the future. By the same token, Notre Dame might not have enjoyed the success it has if it had joined a conference a century ago, and might not maintain their success if they were to join a conference today.

We may never know. But I don't question their right, and their leaders' obligation, to act in the best interest of Notre Dame, both as a football program and a Catholic university. If their decision is inconvenient for other schools' ambitions, so be it.

Most of my posts on this site and others for years are an attempt to counter misconceptions and just plain wrong statements and beliefs about ND as illustrated by your first line.

ND, like every other school, acts in its own best self interest.

The only difference is for most other schools, that self interest is seen as best advanced by football conference membership.

ND, on the other hand, thinks differently, that its self interests are best served by football independence.

If Alabama or Ohio State thought it in their best interests to leave their conferences and be independent, they would do so.

Think not? There is a groundswell recently about the top draw schools making more money than others in their conference, a more "eat what you kill" attitude.

That idea was seen as heresy by most fans ten or fifteen years ago. Now, with money tight....not so much.

There are valid historical reasons why ND is a football independent, reasons unique to ND.

This is a fact that many fans of other schools tend to not know or ignore in favor of "arrogance" or "greedy" (although that idea has largely died in recent years since every P5 school now makes more TV money than ND).

I don't fault Notre Dame for their choice of independence in football. That said, their existence as a football independent at an elite level is not without external enabling. It is fair to say Notre Dame has commanded that by history, tradition, popularity, skillful negotiating, and savvy decision-making.
The old Big East, The Big Ten, Southern Cal, Stanford, NBC, the ACC, the former BCS and current P5 governance structures including all the major commissioners, etc., have all enabled Notre Dame's independence in football. When Notre Dame sits at the table with the commissioners of the BIG, SEC, ACC, B12, and PAC 12, with an equivalent vote and being an equal decider, that's quite accommodating. Notre Dame is not representing independents beyond themselves.

All true.

ND would hot be where it is and wield the power it does if all of the power brokers did not want it to be so.

That is real power, is it not, to have all others with power want you to have power?

ND has never claimed to represent any other football independents.

That is their job.

Except that their power is derived from network desires, not those of their peers.