(11-10-2021 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  As I’ve said before, there’s only two possible next moves in the chess game:

ND joins the ACC or Big 10 as a full member

The SEC goes supernova and adds ACC schools in an attempt to narrow the ranks of the elite to 1 or 2 mega conferences.

Let’s think about these possibilities.

The best case scenario for the BIG is to get ND plus its friend (Pitt, Cuse, BC or Navy). I think the possibility of this happening is low.

The best case scenario for the ACC is also to get ND plus one. Again the possibility is low. The second best scenario for the ACC is to acquire and merge ND’s media right into the ACC’s media pool in exchange of something (access to the ACC championship game?) while leaving the ND football independent. This scenario is a little more likely in my opinion but technically not a conference realignment.

The SEC goes Supernova is an interesting one. I don’t think the SEC wants to expand but what I would like to see is the SEC adding the following eight ACC teams to form a 24 team monster:

UNC, Duke, NCSU, UVa, VT, Clemson, GT, and FSU

The four pods would be:

NE: UVa, VT, UNC, Duke, NCSU, Kentucky
SE: USC-e, Clemson, GT, UGA, FSU, UF
NW: TN, Vandy, Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss St
SW: A&M, UT, OU, LSU, AK, Mizs

For this to happen:
1. The ESPN should sufficiently pay for the move. Maybe dropping the ACC and focusing on the new SEC might be a better deal for the ESPN in a long run.
2. The new SEC should be able to hold the Conference semi finals

The remaining ACC teams may stay together or some may try to leave for the Big 12. Ironically this would also slightly increase the possibility of ND joining the BIG.

I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

(11-16-2021 01:08 PM)random asian guy Wrote:  

(11-10-2021 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  As I’ve said before, there’s only two possible next moves in the chess game:

ND joins the ACC or Big 10 as a full member

The SEC goes supernova and adds ACC schools in an attempt to narrow the ranks of the elite to 1 or 2 mega conferences.

Let’s think about these possibilities.

The best case scenario for the BIG is to get ND plus its friend (Pitt, Cuse, BC or Navy). I think the possibility of this happening is low.

The best case scenario for the ACC is also to get ND plus one. Again the possibility is low. The second best scenario for the ACC is to acquire and merge ND’s media right into the ACC’s media pool in exchange of something (access to the ACC championship game?) while leaving the ND football independent. This scenario is a little more likely in my opinion but technically not a conference realignment.

The SEC goes Supernova is an interesting one. I don’t think the SEC wants to expand but what I would like to see is the SEC adding the following eight ACC teams to form a 24 team monster:

UNC, Duke, NCSU, UVa, VT, Clemson, GT, and FSU

The four pods would be:

NE: UVa, VT, UNC, Duke, NCSU, Kentucky
SE: USC-e, Clemson, GT, UGA, FSU, UF
NW: TN, Vandy, Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss St
SW: A&M, UT, OU, LSU, AK, Mizs

For this to happen:
1. The ESPN should sufficiently pay for the move. Maybe dropping the ACC and focusing on the new SEC might be a better deal for the ESPN in a long run.
2. The new SEC should be able to hold the Conference semi finals

The remaining ACC teams may stay together or some may try to leave for the Big 12. Ironically this would also slightly increase the possibility of ND joining the BIG.

The 4 pods aren't bad but I'd rename them: Atlantic, Eastern, Southern, Central (respectively).

Perhaps 3 pods (division?) would be preferable for the schools?

East: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Atlantic: Clemson, Duke, Florida St, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, Virginia Tech
South: Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

Just out of wild curiosity JR, what would a third trigger be, if the NCAA relented on division structure, conference semis, and hoops value?? Could baseball & ice hockey value be trigger #3???

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-18-2021 12:52 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  I find the whole idea of a breakaway interesting from a Notre Dame perspective. They seem to want to back the SEC and ESPN when it comes to the new CFP playoff proposal but if it ends in the SEC wanting to breakaway as JR suggests(because screw the Alliance), how does this benefit a football program that wants so badly to remain an independent? Just a question

It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

Since the death of P. T. Barnum on April 7th, 1891, there have been approximately
68,703,840
suckers born!

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 07:20 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  It doesn't. This is brinksmanship on the part of Notre Dame.

ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

I'm thinking 4 X 18 would work best JR, and even then the mix is a little diluted.
My short list for the three adds includes:

Boise State
USF
SMU
Temple
Memphis
Tulane
I like the service academies, would the government?
Do the west coast teams you mentioned have the valuation to fit in?

(11-22-2021 03:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 08:10 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND is only "aligned" with the SEC on a greater versus lesser number of at large playoff bids because it wants to remain an independent. That is all.

So, all the "Alliance" has to do is guarantee ND's independent status and reasonable playoff access and then ND would be perfectly aligned with it on most other issues.

If the SEC broke away, ND would not likely go with them.

ND probably views an SEC breakaway as an unlikely thing, particularly in the foreseeable future.

In any event, it views this stance as a better option than being squeezed by the Alliance on playoff expansion as a means of forcing it to join a football conference.

Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

I'm thinking 4 X 18 would work best JR, and even then the mix is a little diluted.
My short list for the three adds includes:

Boise State
USF
SMU
Temple
Memphis
Tulane
I like the service academies, would the government?
Do the west coast teams you mentioned have the valuation to fit in?

San Diego State, probably. Tulane is the best academically and a nice bridge to Texas for USF. But who is added depends on how you align each of the conferences.

(11-22-2021 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 03:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

I'm thinking 4 X 18 would work best JR, and even then the mix is a little diluted.
My short list for the three adds includes:

Boise State
USF
SMU
Temple
Memphis
Tulane
I like the service academies, would the government?
Do the west coast teams you mentioned have the valuation to fit in?

San Diego State, probably. Tulane is the best academically and a nice bridge to Texas for USF. But who is added depends on how you align each of the conferences.

I like Memphis, San Diego St, and South Florida as the final 3 but could see SMU instead of SDSU.

(11-22-2021 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 03:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-19-2021 02:48 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Terry D, prior to associating with the ACC Swarbrick and Slive met. As it was related Swarbrick was interested in learning more about dealing with ESPN and what Slive knew about Swofford and ACC internal issues. He then expressed the desire of a back up plan for scheduling games in Deep South recruiting hotbeds upon which Slive's cooperation was given.

No doubt Notre Dame and the SEC's priorities don't exactly align, but neither will be pushed around! I don't believe a breakaway happens until the SEC is pushed and then it would happen so fast you would believe it happened yesterday. Hoops value is the second trigger should the NCAA relent on divisional structure and conference semis, etc., and try to hold basketball hostage. I consider this to be a classic impasse since the NCAA doesn't know how to fund itself without basketball. So sir, something is indeed going to give in the not too distant future and it is naive to assume it will be the SCOTUS, player's rights, ND, or the SEC.

I believe that PAC 12, Big Ten, ACC, and SEC presidents realize this and that the Big 12 along with Texas and Oklahoma acted on this first.

The best chance that the Big 12 had of surviving the loss of Texas and Oklahoma was to be, oddly, the first to suffer defections and the first to refill. This is what the long line of vetted applicants was about when a Chicago firm valued each 3 or 4 years ago. Did Bowlsby know? Who knows. But UT and OU had no intention of staying with those being looked at so why do it? To mitigate for other state schools their departures.

Swarbrick had to know, as close as he was in communications with the Texas administration and Slive, the fears and thoughts they had when the Alston case was first filed, and prior to that the changes they saw coming due to a number of external factors from demographics, to immigration, and of course the economy, not to mention CTE's.

If there is a breakaway it is likely that conferences as we know them are consumed within it. What ND or any of us do in that world is an unknown.

The SEC will likely remain amenable to scheduling ND and indifferent to your disposition.

What I find interesting in this discussion is X's position of laying an onus which is precisely the cover UNC and Duke would look for, and his denial with me over the pair of them testing their chances for asylum in the SEC in the midst of the Maryland announcement, which they did.

I have zero doubts that UNC, Duke, and Virginia will act in their own self interests or that they desire one another's company in a move. The potential to fully monetize hoops changes their equation in realignment and their options. Nobody is going to sustain a 40 million dollar annual deficit in media revenue, especially if pay for play emerges in the current legal and political world. UT and OU knew this.

This is why I have stated on several occasions that giants never move unless they can see something on the horizon that scares even them. This is why Texas moved first and took Oklahoma with them instead of like 2011 when it was the other way around when Boren wanted movement (but with OSU in tow).

UNC & Duke know what is coming. It is their nature to need someone upon which to lay the onus. Tag you're it!

We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

I'm thinking 4 X 18 would work best JR, and even then the mix is a little diluted.
My short list for the three adds includes:

Boise State
USF
SMU
Temple
Memphis
Tulane
I like the service academies, would the government?
Do the west coast teams you mentioned have the valuation to fit in?

San Diego State, probably. Tulane is the best academically and a nice bridge to Texas for USF. But who is added depends on how you align each of the conferences.

Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
PAC needs: CTZ, football audience
SEC needs: basketball power, continued access to population
B1G needs: ego stroked, AAU schools
ACC needs: a little of everything

(using San Diego State, Tulane, USF)

PAC
Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, Utah
Stanford, UCLA, USC, San Diego State, Arizona, Arizona State
BYU, Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU

SEC
Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU
USF, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky
Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Ohio State, Indiana
Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Nebraska, Kansas

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State
UCF, Virginia Tech, UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
Miami, Tulane, Houston, Baylor, Cincinnati, West Virginia



More logically we would break things down into 18, 18, 18, 15 and not have to elevate any other G level schools

PAC
Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, BYU
Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, UCLA, USC

SEC
Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU
UCF, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky
Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Northwestern
Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin

ACC
UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Baylor, Houston
Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Louisville, Miami
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

There is still a possibility the Big 12 takes Memphis and Boise (perhaps SMU and USF also) to:

1) Cement a 5+1+6 permanent P5 playoff bid by stripping the G5 of its final value, and/or
2) Respond to a Pac 12 raid of the Big 12

The Pac 12 TV negotiations will tell the tale on #2. If they can get a lot of value by adding Big 12 schools, they will try.

(11-23-2021 08:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
PAC needs: CTZ, football audience
SEC needs: basketball power, continued access to population
B1G needs: ego stroked, AAU schools
ACC needs: a little of everything

Love your analysis of the various conference needs!

(11-23-2021 08:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 03:59 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-22-2021 03:47 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(11-21-2021 11:39 AM)XLance Wrote:  We now have 69 P teams divided into 5 conferences.
Since Jan. 12, 1969 (the first "Super Bowl" when the Jets defeated the Colts, now know as super bowl 3) the sports world in the US has been enthralled with playoffs.
College football, which is late to the party, is the last major sporting event that has shunned the playoff fever that has swept professional sports.
The networks have discovered the potential and have laid the groundwork while the schools themselves have fought tooth and nail to keep things from happening. Until now, when money has become the motivator.
The trick will be to divide those 69 schools into 4 or 5 units that will provide the feeders into some sort of playoff structure such that all of the P units can profit from a collegiate football tournament..
Now that we have identified all of the players, the division into entities can now be finalized once the playoff structure can be agreed on.

No matter what you call the trigger to cause those final decisions, they will be made, and soon.
It is said that there are two steps between honesty and dishonesty and they are opportunity and need. The same can be applied to the "integrity" of college sports. Like it or not, the collegiate sports world finds itself with massive need for a multitude of reasons and an opportunity to sell it soul.
Somebody, somewhere in a "smoke filled room" will look at those 69 schools and devise a way to divide them into 4 or 5 units, such that the schools and the networks will be able to profit and college football will survive.
How long will it be before the Gladiators return to the arena?

Well X, they will either add 3 more, or cull 4, and divide by 4, if they want the structure to produce the participants. If they want to keep a finger, a tainted one, in the process we will divide by 3 which means an at large must be selected. This would mean 3 conferences of 24 as opposed to 4 conferences of 18. I would think it easier and a bit more politically savvy to add 3. Service Academies? San Diego State, Fresno State and Boise State? Others? You could push this out to 80 and segregate by earnings and value. I think 20 still works for a natural rotation within a 3 year conference span. 24 means you only play within conference and I don't see networks going for that.

So for win / loss balance, segregating by value and making each competitive in football and basketball and allowing for outside of conference games means a 4 x 20 or 4 x 18 are more likely and a 3 x 18, or 3 x 20, or 3 x 24 either too exclusive or too unwieldy to be as likely.

And we don't know, and won't know, which if any of the current 65 step down until it happens, and having a few do so is still probable. So, we'll see.

With gambling involvement becoming more prevalent as the unseen booth officials increase the number of inexplicable and ambiguous rulings, I expect the finger in the selection process to disappear in order to try to keep the public believing in some semblance of fairness. Every now and then I wish P.T. Barnum was wrong!

I'm thinking 4 X 18 would work best JR, and even then the mix is a little diluted.
My short list for the three adds includes:

Boise State
USF
SMU
Temple
Memphis
Tulane
I like the service academies, would the government?
Do the west coast teams you mentioned have the valuation to fit in?

San Diego State, probably. Tulane is the best academically and a nice bridge to Texas for USF. But who is added depends on how you align each of the conferences.

Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
PAC needs: CTZ, football audience
SEC needs: basketball power, continued access to population
B1G needs: ego stroked, AAU schools
ACC needs: a little of everything

(using San Diego State, Tulane, USF)

PAC
Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State, Utah
Stanford, UCLA, USC, San Diego State, Arizona, Arizona State
BYU, Colorado, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU

SEC
Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU
USF, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky
Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Ohio State, Indiana
Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Nebraska, Kansas

ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State
UCF, Virginia Tech, UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
Miami, Tulane, Houston, Baylor, Cincinnati, West Virginia



More logically we would break things down into 18, 18, 18, 15 and not have to elevate any other G level schools

PAC
Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, TCU, BYU
Washington, Washington State, Oregon, Oregon State, Cal, Stanford
Utah, Colorado, Arizona, Arizona State, UCLA, USC

SEC
Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, LSU
UCF, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky
Louisville, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Ole Miss, Mississippi State

B1G
Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Pitt, Indiana
Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Northwestern
Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin

ACC
UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Baylor, Houston
Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Louisville, Miami
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

At 69 + 3, I'm adding Memphis, San Diego St, and South Florida.

Here's a different sort of alignment (8 x 9):

PAC: California, Oregon, Oregon St, San Diego St, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St

SWC: Arizona, Arizona St, Arkansas, Baylor, BYU, TCU, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech

IX: Colorado, Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Utah

SEC: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Tennessee

B1G: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio St, Purdue, Wisconsin

ACC: Clemson, Duke, Florida St, Georgia Tech, Maryland, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Virginia, Wake Forest

ECC: Boston College, Miami, Michigan St, Notre Dame, Penn St, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, Vanderbilt

METRO: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, Memphis, South Carolina, South Florida, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

(If Notre Dame insists on independence, add in SMU. Slide Virginia Tech into the ECC and place SMU into the METRO.)

(11-23-2021 08:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
...
ACC needs: a little of everything

...
ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State
UCF, Virginia Tech, UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
Miami, Tulane, Houston, Baylor, Cincinnati, West Virginia

Correct assessment of ACC need; utter failure to meet that need.

Quote:More logically we would break things down into 18, 18, 18, 15 and not have to elevate any other G level schools

...
ACC
UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Baylor, Houston
Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Louisville, Miami
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Much, much better!

That said, the ACC would probably keep Pitt if possible. Since you showed Louisville in both the SEC and ACC, I assume you are still trying to get rid of the Cardinals? It might make the most sense to have WVU go to the SEC, but if UL did leave, WVU is the most logical replacement.

(11-23-2021 02:26 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 08:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
...
ACC needs: a little of everything

...
ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State
UCF, Virginia Tech, UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
Miami, Tulane, Houston, Baylor, Cincinnati, West Virginia

Correct assessment of ACC need; utter failure to meet that need.

Quote:More logically we would break things down into 18, 18, 18, 15 and not have to elevate any other G level schools

...
ACC
UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Baylor, Houston
Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Louisville, Miami
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Much, much better!

That said, the ACC would probably keep Pitt if possible. Since you showed Louisville in both the SEC and ACC, I assume you are still trying to get rid of the Cardinals? It might make the most sense to have WVU go to the SEC, but if UL did leave, WVU is the most logical replacement.

Fundamentally flawed, all of it. Moves happen that increase conference and school revenue. Louisville and/or West Virginia don't increase the SEC's revenue, not even a bit. Both are drains on current payouts. Clemson no longer has a shot. FSU is only a slight increase to lateral move. UNC and Virginia are only profitable for the SEC if hoops are liberated from the NCAA. Pitt is not a profitable addition for the Big 10.

If we have further consolidation and a break-away I look for 4 conferences to emerge of between 16 to 20 members each. Those conferences will be delineated by the revenue earning potential of members for all sports offered.

In that world the networks will encourage such economic segregation because it helps their bottom line. I'm being serious when I say in that world UNC and UVa will hold more interest to the SEC than Clemson or FSU and Clemson and FSU will be needed by the network as anchors in a more competitive football conference.

At this juncture the SEC is well stocked in name brand and historically recognized football programs. Does FSU and Clemson really add to that, of just get lost in it? The SEC could however find balance and improve its basketball branding. So ESPN makes room for better ACC football by clearing out 2-3 slots and removing the main obstacles to ACC development by paying UNC / UVa / & maybe Duke to move and form associations with Texas, A&M, Vandy, and Florida, enhance their value against Kentucky, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri and Florida hoops and possibly even Kansas hoops. A 12 member ACC then has room to add 8 football first schools which bulk up the number of content games to be offered.

ESPN sews up the B12 by effectively absorbing most into the ACC and by pushing 4 conferences gets a system which one day may leverage Notre Dame.

It's consolidation for the SEC / ACC / B12, but also consolidation for ESPN

There currently exists a relatively similar value between Baylor, Houston, BYU, Kansas State, TCU, Texas Tech, Iowa State, Cincinnati, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, Georgia Tech. And similar value exists between Oklahoma State, Miami, Virginia Tech, and N.C. State. And similar value between Central Florida, Wake Forest, and Boston College. Clemson and Florida State comprise another tier up while the previously suggested groupings are all close enough in value to be extremely cohesive and competitive which enhances their value.

Should Notre Dame ever join anyone in full it would have to be the B1G or SEC in order to have financial fit. As an independent affiliated with the ACC in a conference comprised of the aforementioned would share a mutually beneficial relationship with them as the Irish have recruiting access to Texas, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and New England.

So, if you assume the PAC 12 may be interested in Texas markets at some point you need to focus on the best 9 for the ACC and move first.

Cincinnati, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

Clemson, Louisville, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

Baylor, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Houston, Miami

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas Tech

That's a 15 state footprint with extra representation in the 2 largest states. This way you only share Florida / Texas / North Carolina / Virginia and Georgia with the SEC and ESPN controls them all.

(11-23-2021 02:26 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(11-23-2021 08:00 AM)XLance Wrote:  Well, I'll give it a quick run through.
...
ACC needs: a little of everything

...
ACC
Boston College, Syracuse, Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State
UCF, Virginia Tech, UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech
Miami, Tulane, Houston, Baylor, Cincinnati, West Virginia

Correct assessment of ACC need; utter failure to meet that need.

Quote:More logically we would break things down into 18, 18, 18, 15 and not have to elevate any other G level schools

...
ACC
UVa, Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, Baylor, Houston
Boston College, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Cincinnati, Louisville, Miami
Wake Forest, NC State, Clemson, Florida State, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Much, much better!

That said, the ACC would probably keep Pitt if possible. Since you showed Louisville in both the SEC and ACC, I assume you are still trying to get rid of the Cardinals? It might make the most sense to have WVU go to the SEC, but if UL did leave, WVU is the most logical replacement.

I should have taken my socks off so that I could count up to 18.

Keeping Louisville would be a positive for the ACC, but the SEC actually needs another true basketball power.
Louisville's spot in the ACC should have been listed as UCF.