In my order of likelihood:

The Big 12 Gets Absorbed

This could happen in a number of ways and your guess is as good as mine as to how it might break down.

1. Everyone in the remaining P4 conferences could cooperate and move to 16 by dividing up the Big 12. Texas could go ACC, Big 10, PAC or long shot SEC. The same can be said of Oklahoma with the SEC not being a long shot.

2. The PAC could take 4, the Big 10 2, and the ACC 4 to create a Western Division in which case the SEC expands by taking N.C. State and Virginia Tech from the ACC.

3. The Big 10 could take 4 and the PAC could take 6 for FOX.

4. ESPN could encourage the ACC to take 4 and Cincinnati and the SEC to take 6.

The Big 12 Expands

1. The Big 12 adds 2 of Cincinnati, B.Y.U., Colorado State and South Florida, (or you pick the two that you like) and they end all speculation that they are shopping around.

Such a move will immediately produce some surprise additions to the P5.
Maybe the SEC adds a couple of surprises for example if the Big 12 added South Florida, B.Y.U. and Colorado State maybe they let West Virginia join East Carolina in the SEC. Maybe the ACC gets Cincinnati before the Big 12 and brings in someone like Temple. Maybe the Big 10 goes for Buffalo and Connecticut. We could wind up with Big 10 at 16, SEC at 16, ACC at 16 (or 16 plus ND), the Big 12 at 12 and the PAC at 12 for 72 total.

Delany opens a 2 front war.

In order to secure a 20 team media extravaganza Jim Delany finds a way to poach both the ACC and Big 12 opening up a realignment confrontation (or war). He picks up Virginia, Boston College (hockey), and Syracuse to land Notre Dame and adds Kansas from the East. He rounds out his 20 with a preference for North Carolina and a settle for Duke as the Heels insist on a home for the Wolfpack.

Slive matches Delany, and solidifies his South with North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Florida State.

Larry Scott goes bananas and takes 7 from the Big 12 and adds another to get to 20. He gets Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, T.C.U., Texas, and Texas Tech.

Slive finds more value and solidifies the S.E.C. at 24 by adding Baylor for a bigger piece of the DFW area, West Virginia and Pitt for two new states a fierce rivalry and another AAU school, and rounds it out with Louisville.

Now we have 3 conferences containing 64 teams with better geographical boundaries.

I hold the Delany 2 front war scenario to be complete fantasy but what the hell.

Is it impossible? No The 10 teams of the Big 12 are accounted for. Initially 10 of the 14 full ACC members are taken enough to be only one shy of the 11 needed to void the GOR for them and in the final move for the SEC Slive hits the majic number and passes it with the additions of Louisville and Pitt. Game over welcome to the world of P3.

Missing in action are Wake Forest and Miami.

What scenarios for the end game do you envision?

I agree that Big 12 absorption is the most likely scenario, but we have all tried to guess what Texas would do before and been burned.

The more scenarios I see, the more I believe that the B1G and SEC will stick to their guns and invite only those that meet their existing criteria. Is any gang of conferences going to seriously consider making rules that would disqualify the SEC or B1G, such as a minimum number of school members or how they decide their conference champs? I don't think so... nobody is making the SEC or B1G do anything now or in the foreseeable future. So, The B1G will bring in state flagships that are contiguous and are AAU members. Similarly, the SEC will bring in state flagships that are contiguous. Nothing in their histories or recent statements suggest otherwise. I believe when it comes to those two conferences, the adage "the more things change, the more they stay the same" will hold true.

(08-12-2013 11:11 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  I agree that Big 12 absorption is the most likely scenario, but we have all tried to guess what Texas would do before and been burned.

The more scenarios I see, the more I believe that the B1G and SEC will stick to their guns and invite only those that meet their existing criteria. Is any gang of conferences going to seriously consider making rules that would disqualify the SEC or B1G, such as a minimum number of school members or how they decide their conference champs? I don't think so... nobody is making the SEC or B1G do anything now or in the foreseeable future. So, The B1G will bring in state flagships that are contiguous and are AAU members. Similarly, the SEC will bring in state flagships that are contiguous. Nothing in their histories or recent statements suggest otherwise. I believe when it comes to those two conferences, the adage "the more things change, the more they stay the same" will hold true.

I like your thinking here. Oklahoma and West Virginia are not AAU but are flagships so there are your two to 16 for the SEC. Kansas is AAU and would love to be part of the Big 10 so there is one for them. Buffalo has been rumored as well and is also AAU. Then there is the Canadian option that is intriguing as well. Either way number two for the Big 10 wouldn't come from the Big 12 unless it was either Texas who for a variety of reasons won't go Big 10, or Iowa State a redundant addition that the Big 10 is not likely to take. If Texas goes west they could easily move with Kansas State, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech. That satisfies the PAC completely but it doesn't get you to the required number of 8. Plus Dodds says he looks to the East. So let's say Texas does go to the ACC as a hybrid and the price of admission is Baylor and TCU and Iowa State takes their place in the group headed West. Now all 10 get placed. There are those who say the PAC won't go for that foursome without the big prize. However I agree with He1nous that the four central time zone slots and the additions of Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas to the PAC footprint would still be a better option than what they face out West. So maybe the deal gets done that way. It will be interesting to find out.

I also agree with you that the two largest and most powerful players aren't going to compromise their positions at least not on choices number 15 & 16. If it gets bigger than that then all initial criteria has to be subject to change.

I would go with B12 expands. While we've constructed multiple scenarios for moving Texas, in the end I think the Longhorns would prefer to keep their kingdom. Since 14 is too wonky a number, conferences expand to 16 or if the get the rules rewritten, 15. I would like to see 18, but there is a significant drop-off in value after 16 w/o B12 teams in the mix.

You already know mine.

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

I see Kansas as a dead ringer for the B1G.
WVU is a great fit for the SEC, which is ready for them now.
Texas has a great ACC option, like ND.
B1G and SEC take one more. That will be fun figuring those two out.

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if when you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

I will take OSU hands down if we can finally get WVU into the SEC. They will be a TAMU type threat to OU as far as recruiting. They might dominate their state.

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

Yep, figured I have stated my theory enough that I didn't have to illustrate it again.

You make good point about the PAC protesting the whole situation. Personally though, I just don't think their protesting will have much clout in the situation. It is going to come down first and foremost to where Texas and Oklahoma want to go.

I don't mean to come off as a biased Big Ten guy, that is not my angle. The Big Ten needs the biggest facelift in football if we are to end up with four conferences that the Networks will want to present as equal. That means the Big Ten truly will need Oklahoma to come along. The Big Ten has certain issues to overcome unfortunately. The SEC doesn't really need any more Elite programs in terms of history. From the perspective of an Alabama or a Florida or a Georgia or even an LSU, do you want Oklahoma to come in? Maybe you beat them down to just being an outlier or maybe they considerably boost their recruiting and get back to where they historically have been. To those SEC Elites, would not some of them possibly think Oklahoma State is the safer pick? As the SEC program of Oklahoma, perhaps they even surpass Oklahoma in strength. They are certainly the ones with all the momentum.

The PAC has the most to gain from the "lesser" brands of the Big 12 due to time zone issues. That is why I would expect the other conferences to talk Scott into it. In the end, Texas Tech could become an extremely strong program out on it's own in the PAC. No other Texas teams to stand over it. That would be the surprise pick for the PAC in my opinion, especially with their new coach.

In terms of some other schools slipping in at the cost of some of these Big 12 schools being left behind? I just cant see that happening. I actually give some of these administrators the benefit of the doubt in the Big 12 as being good folks who do like their conference mates. I do think it very likely they all stand firm unless they all get a decent landing spot. I don't see them going at this any other way. Enough of them would threaten to vote no on the dissolution in order to keep Texas in line on this and Texas will have to play ball for the votes.


In terms of the Big 12 staying together by getting these other pickups? The Big 12 would be going into this new future looking to be the weakest conference. Not a very strong position to be in. If they likes those options, the Big 12 would not be a 10 team conference right now.

(08-13-2013 12:08 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if when you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

I will take OSU hands down if we can finally get WVU into the SEC. They will be a TAMU type threat to OU as far as recruiting. They might dominate their state.

I absolutely agree. Oklahoma State is the hungrier program of the two. They will still have Texas recruiting but their available recruiting areas of the country will expand tremendously. I could easily see them outpacing Oklahoma. That is the one aspect of my theory that worries me. That Oklahoma would strongly fear this possibility as well. I don't see them willing to go SEC to block it though so I foresee them choosing between the PAC and Big Ten. I do think that Oklahoma would choose the Big Ten since they no longer would be making the move to try and force Texas into the same move.

(08-13-2013 04:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:08 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if when you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

I will take OSU hands down if we can finally get WVU into the SEC. They will be a TAMU type threat to OU as far as recruiting. They might dominate their state.

I absolutely agree. Oklahoma State is the hungrier program of the two. They will still have Texas recruiting but their available recruiting areas of the country will expand tremendously. I could easily see them outpacing Oklahoma. That is the one aspect of my theory that worries me. That Oklahoma would strongly fear this possibility as well. I don't see them willing to go SEC to block it though so I foresee them choosing between the PAC and Big Ten. I do think that Oklahoma would choose the Big Ten since they no longer would be making the move to try and force Texas into the same move.

OU will probably be gone already by the time the SEC picks up OSU and WVU. You think Texas will precipitate this kind of move, or does the B1G pull the trigger on OU and KU, and leaving UT to run to the ACC?

(08-14-2013 01:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 04:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:08 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 09:09 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  You already know mine.

Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if when you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

I will take OSU hands down if we can finally get WVU into the SEC. They will be a TAMU type threat to OU as far as recruiting. They might dominate their state.

I absolutely agree. Oklahoma State is the hungrier program of the two. They will still have Texas recruiting but their available recruiting areas of the country will expand tremendously. I could easily see them outpacing Oklahoma. That is the one aspect of my theory that worries me. That Oklahoma would strongly fear this possibility as well. I don't see them willing to go SEC to block it though so I foresee them choosing between the PAC and Big Ten. I do think that Oklahoma would choose the Big Ten since they no longer would be making the move to try and force Texas into the same move.

OU will probably be gone already by the time the SEC picks up OSU and WVU. You think Texas will precipitate this kind of move, or does the B1G pull the trigger on OU and KU, and leaving UT to run to the ACC?

UT likely already knows what they want to do if movement happens. I think for their reputations sake inside the state of Texas they will not be the ones to initiate movement, but would be more than willing to take advantage of it.

The more scenarios I see, the more it seems like Texas to the ACC as a Notre Dame partial member is the 100% slam dunk along with Kansas to the B1G. Other than that...?

(08-14-2013 02:20 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  The more scenarios I see, the more it seems like Texas to the ACC as a Notre Dame partial member is the 100% slam dunk along with Kansas to the B1G. Other than that...?

I'll just speak frankly for a moment. If the choice is for the SEC to expand out of the Big 12 with two teams while West Virginia seems like a go, to refer to your posts in another thread, their academics are worse than the Mississippi Schools, but they do earn more. So I'm not sold that they would be appealing to the SEC. Iowa State is middling but solid in all areas. That might be the dark horse that helps Missouri out. They aren't the flagship of Iowa, but I'm not sure the Hawkeyes are much better than Iowa State. Mind you they wouldn't be my pick because of culture but I'm just saying they fill the bill in several ways for the SEC.

Kansas State is not the flagship but they are in a larger state and they are profitable. Their sports programs are upper middle tier in the big 3 sports in the Big 12.

Oklahoma State brings a lot to the table for the SEC in minor sports and are competitive all the way around. They are the 25th most profitable program. But do we take them with the Sooners?

Oklahoma is the only school left from the Big 12 that would not raise eyebrows or engender questions if they came our way.

If you get Oklahoma you don't need TCU for the DFW market, or Baylor for that matter. Texas A&M and Oklahoma deliver both Texas and Oklahoma for us and compliment each other well.

Back to West Virginia they deliver a slither of a market we want. That's it.

If I'm Mike Slive and I have to make a decision today I would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. (I think they want to go as a pair because OU will have to schedule Texas and doesn't want to risk losing OSU from the schedule should they also wind up in different conferences.) My second choice would be Oklahoma and Iowa State but it would be a hard sell to the fans.

As a fan I want Oklahoma and West Virginia.

But to be absolutely frank, I don't want another Big 12 team. I would rather have N.C. State and Virginia Tech and let the ACC make room for a western division of 4 from the Big 12. Besides there is some probability that Wake doesn't make the bump up. Then ND and Texas could join fully along with three others from the Big 12. Then we are at 4 x 16 and the ACC gets to maximize its footprint and the SEC gets to stay somewhat more compact.

What say you BBB?

(08-14-2013 02:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 02:20 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  The more scenarios I see, the more it seems like Texas to the ACC as a Notre Dame partial member is the 100% slam dunk along with Kansas to the B1G. Other than that...?

I'll just speak frankly for a moment. If the choice is for the SEC to expand out of the Big 12 with two teams while West Virginia seems like a go, to refer to your posts in another thread, their academics are worse than the Mississippi Schools, but they do earn more. So I'm not sold that they would be appealing to the SEC. Iowa State is middling but solid in all areas. That might be the dark horse that helps Missouri out. They aren't the flagship of Iowa, but I'm not sure the Hawkeyes are much better than Iowa State. Mind you they wouldn't be my pick because of culture but I'm just saying they fill the bill in several ways for the SEC.

Kansas State is not the flagship but they are in a larger state and they are profitable. Their sports programs are upper middle tier in the big 3 sports in the Big 12.

Oklahoma State brings a lot to the table for the SEC in minor sports and are competitive all the way around. They are the 25th most profitable program. But do we take them with the Sooners?

Oklahoma is the only school left from the Big 12 that would not raise eyebrows or engender questions if they came our way.

If you get Oklahoma you don't need TCU for the DFW market, or Baylor for that matter. Texas A&M and Oklahoma deliver both Texas and Oklahoma for us and compliment each other well.

Back to West Virginia they deliver a slither of a market we want. That's it.

If I'm Mike Slive and I have to make a decision today I would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. My second choice would be Oklahoma and Iowa State but it would be a hard sell to the fans.

As a fan I want Oklahoma and West Virginia.

What say you BBB?

You are exactly right with your descriptions of the teams. Oklahoma is a slam dunk, no question. I was totally on board with West Virginia only if we landed a North Carolina and a Virginia school from the ACC and we needed one more team to even out another addition from the Big 12, such as Oklahoma. West Virginia without a school from NC and VA is much less appealing from a front office standpoint.

Ughhh.... this is a hard one, JR. It is hard to justify passing on FSU, Clemson, and/or Georgia Tech as even rough draft possibilities but then taking in Oklahoma State. With the exception of football revenue for Georgia Tech, all three of those schools are equal to or outpace Oklahoma State historically in every area that is important to the SEC. It just feels like settling to take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State as a package.

Iowa State... wow, it just feels so forced. A geographical outlier needs to have some compelling connection, such as a huge percentage of Colorado's alumni, business, and general culture gravitating toward California. The PAC made sense in that scenario. What does Iowa State share with the rest of the SEC? I'm not sure there is anything noteworthy.

Let me think on this more and come back with an actual solution or decision. I'm still heartbroken that UNC and Oklahoma doesn't look possible any longer.

(08-14-2013 02:14 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 01:45 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 04:31 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:08 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(08-13-2013 12:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Let's see. KU and OU to the Big 10, Texas as a hybrid with two tag alongs to the ACC in Baylor and T.C.U., West Virginia and Oklahoma State to the SEC. And Iowa State, KState, and Texas Tech to the PAC, plus a West Coast team. Which is also a very plausible scenario under the present conditions.

With all the leaks about who is talking to whom right now, I still find it hard to believe that any conference is trying to lure one of the remaining prospects all on their own. It seems to me that nothing gets done now without consensus and that we are going to enter a few months now of little to no news other than more of these so and so is talking to so and so stories. The "talking to" leaks are just the negotiation process working itself out as the parties try to come to some agreement of how to wrap this thing up.

The reason I put "the Big 12 gets absorbed" at the top of my list is that Texas and Oklahoma don't have compelling schedules for their fans. Nothing against the other 7 football first schools of the Big 12 but outside of the RRR there are no must see games. OU/OSU is the distant second plumb game. Therefore with nobody that moves the needle for them expansion wise, a tiny disjointed footprint, and still inequity in member earning potential all coupled with the fact that their earning potential is maxed out while at least three maybe four other conferences around them still have a fairly nice upside in their potentials and I just believe they have no other option that is both profitable and provides them with more compelling scheduling than to be absorbed.

Because of this what I would prefer for the SEC and what you would prefer for the Big 10 both seem to be likely with one exception in both cases. If Texas goes to the ACC there are only 2 national brands, one regional brand, and two highly profitable schools left to help with the division. I don't think that the Big 10 or SEC will land two of the national brands. The PAC is going to insist upon one of them.

I think the Big 10 gets Kansas. I think the SEC gets one of the regional brands in West Virginia and then one of the two remaining highly profitable schools (Oklahoma State and Kansas State). I think the PAC gets Oklahoma and as we both agree three other central time zone money making opportunities. But don't be surprised if Texas goes to the ACC if one of the two that go with them is not from the Big 12. For another academics boost the Horns might take either Rice or Tulane with them. While I give that less of a % of happening than Texas taking two Big 12 schools with them I still consider it to be a possibility. Especially if when you consider that Tulane would be a bridge of sorts between Texas and Florida for the ACC schools. It will be fun to see how they work this out.

As far as Vandiver's viewpoint on the Big 12 staying put and expanding, that scenario would probably help the upper tier more by accommodating the extra schools necessary to keep the profile of winners and losers closer to what it is today and it would be a huge boon to ECU and South Florida fans and to Cincinnati. But I'm afraid the networks won't go for it as easily as the 64 team model. But again it may be what would be best for all, but we'll see.

I will take OSU hands down if we can finally get WVU into the SEC. They will be a TAMU type threat to OU as far as recruiting. They might dominate their state.

I absolutely agree. Oklahoma State is the hungrier program of the two. They will still have Texas recruiting but their available recruiting areas of the country will expand tremendously. I could easily see them outpacing Oklahoma. That is the one aspect of my theory that worries me. That Oklahoma would strongly fear this possibility as well. I don't see them willing to go SEC to block it though so I foresee them choosing between the PAC and Big Ten. I do think that Oklahoma would choose the Big Ten since they no longer would be making the move to try and force Texas into the same move.

OU will probably be gone already by the time the SEC picks up OSU and WVU. You think Texas will precipitate this kind of move, or does the B1G pull the trigger on OU and KU, and leaving UT to run to the ACC?

UT likely already knows what they want to do if movement happens. I think for their reputations sake inside the state of Texas they will not be the ones to initiate movement, but would be more than willing to take advantage of it.

I am kind of in agreement with JR here in terms of the public order of how things go but I absolutely think Texas would be the "Broker" as they would have to be the ones making the most deals with other schools in the conference in order to make this happen.

They would have to broker a deal with Oklahoma.

They would have to broker a deal with Texas Tech.

They would have to talk Baylor and TCU into going with them which means a whole lot of travel for all sports.

They would have to make the rest realize that this is happening with their help or without it and they would probably also have to make sure that the SEC was alright with the WVU and OSU expansion in order to assure those votes too.

Before any of this happens, Texas would have to know that the Vote would absolutely go in favor. You don't take on a dissolution vote without knowing without a doubt that it will end in your favor.

Texas is the kingpin.

(08-14-2013 02:59 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 02:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 02:20 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  The more scenarios I see, the more it seems like Texas to the ACC as a Notre Dame partial member is the 100% slam dunk along with Kansas to the B1G. Other than that...?

I'll just speak frankly for a moment. If the choice is for the SEC to expand out of the Big 12 with two teams while West Virginia seems like a go, to refer to your posts in another thread, their academics are worse than the Mississippi Schools, but they do earn more. So I'm not sold that they would be appealing to the SEC. Iowa State is middling but solid in all areas. That might be the dark horse that helps Missouri out. They aren't the flagship of Iowa, but I'm not sure the Hawkeyes are much better than Iowa State. Mind you they wouldn't be my pick because of culture but I'm just saying they fill the bill in several ways for the SEC.

Kansas State is not the flagship but they are in a larger state and they are profitable. Their sports programs are upper middle tier in the big 3 sports in the Big 12.

Oklahoma State brings a lot to the table for the SEC in minor sports and are competitive all the way around. They are the 25th most profitable program. But do we take them with the Sooners?

Oklahoma is the only school left from the Big 12 that would not raise eyebrows or engender questions if they came our way.

If you get Oklahoma you don't need TCU for the DFW market, or Baylor for that matter. Texas A&M and Oklahoma deliver both Texas and Oklahoma for us and compliment each other well.

Back to West Virginia they deliver a slither of a market we want. That's it.

If I'm Mike Slive and I have to make a decision today I would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. My second choice would be Oklahoma and Iowa State but it would be a hard sell to the fans.

As a fan I want Oklahoma and West Virginia.

What say you BBB?

You are exactly right with your descriptions of the teams. Oklahoma is a slam dunk, no question. I was totally on board with West Virginia only if we landed a North Carolina and a Virginia school from the ACC and we needed one more team to even out another addition from the Big 12, such as Oklahoma. West Virginia without a school from NC and VA is much less appealing from a front office standpoint.

Ughhh.... this is a hard one, JR. It is hard to justify passing on FSU, Clemson, and/or Georgia Tech as even rough draft possibilities but then taking in Oklahoma State. With the exception of football revenue for Georgia Tech, all three of those schools are equal to or outpace Oklahoma State historically in every area that is important to the SEC. It just feels like settling to take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State as a package.

Iowa State... wow, it just feels so forced. A geographical outlier needs to have some compelling connection, such as a huge percentage of Colorado's alumni, business, and general culture gravitating toward California. The PAC made sense in that scenario. What does Iowa State share with the rest of the SEC? I'm not sure there is anything noteworthy.

Let me think on this more and come back with an actual solution or decision. I'm still heartbroken that UNC and Oklahoma doesn't look possible any longer.

No way would I ever try to tackle the effort of trying to debate Oklahoma State and West Virginia being better pick ups than Virginia Tech and NC State. As fans I can wholeheartedly agree with you guys wanting them instead. It would be strange if you didn't.

The problem is what is ideal and what is real. What do you want and what can you actually get? If you can get those two in a much more complicated situation then the SEC should absolutely explore that possibility to the fullest. I just don't see it happening though. Look at Virginia Tech's latest OOC schedulings. They aren't trying to schedule the SEC, they are trying to schedule the biggest brands in the Big Ten. That makes me believe their public statements about not wanting to move to the SEC. If the ACC broke up then I think they would but otherwise I don't see them agreeing to leave an ACC that is staying in tact and may even possibly be having Texas and two of it's sisters coming with.

So for me, when the ideal becomes obviously unrealizable then you have to look at your best option in terms of actually getting to 16 where you want to be so all of the major conferences can move forward. If the SEC, B1G, PAC and ACC can all get to 16 in one big move then that right there is PERFECT for all of them. Through that kind of cooperation the BIGGER goal can be achieved. OSU and WVU will prove to be great adds for that reason. Progress can continue and they will both fit in well geographically in terms of creating brand new divisions.

(08-14-2013 02:59 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 02:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 02:20 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  The more scenarios I see, the more it seems like Texas to the ACC as a Notre Dame partial member is the 100% slam dunk along with Kansas to the B1G. Other than that...?

I'll just speak frankly for a moment. If the choice is for the SEC to expand out of the Big 12 with two teams while West Virginia seems like a go, to refer to your posts in another thread, their academics are worse than the Mississippi Schools, but they do earn more. So I'm not sold that they would be appealing to the SEC. Iowa State is middling but solid in all areas. That might be the dark horse that helps Missouri out. They aren't the flagship of Iowa, but I'm not sure the Hawkeyes are much better than Iowa State. Mind you they wouldn't be my pick because of culture but I'm just saying they fill the bill in several ways for the SEC.

Kansas State is not the flagship but they are in a larger state and they are profitable. Their sports programs are upper middle tier in the big 3 sports in the Big 12.

Oklahoma State brings a lot to the table for the SEC in minor sports and are competitive all the way around. They are the 25th most profitable program. But do we take them with the Sooners?

Oklahoma is the only school left from the Big 12 that would not raise eyebrows or engender questions if they came our way.

If you get Oklahoma you don't need TCU for the DFW market, or Baylor for that matter. Texas A&M and Oklahoma deliver both Texas and Oklahoma for us and compliment each other well.

Back to West Virginia they deliver a slither of a market we want. That's it.

If I'm Mike Slive and I have to make a decision today I would take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. My second choice would be Oklahoma and Iowa State but it would be a hard sell to the fans.

As a fan I want Oklahoma and West Virginia.

What say you BBB?

You are exactly right with your descriptions of the teams. Oklahoma is a slam dunk, no question. I was totally on board with West Virginia only if we landed a North Carolina and a Virginia school from the ACC and we needed one more team to even out another addition from the Big 12, such as Oklahoma. West Virginia without a school from NC and VA is much less appealing from a front office standpoint.

Ughhh.... this is a hard one, JR. It is hard to justify passing on FSU, Clemson, and/or Georgia Tech as even rough draft possibilities but then taking in Oklahoma State. With the exception of football revenue for Georgia Tech, all three of those schools are equal to or outpace Oklahoma State historically in every area that is important to the SEC. It just feels like settling to take Oklahoma and Oklahoma State as a package.

Iowa State... wow, it just feels so forced. A geographical outlier needs to have some compelling connection, such as a huge percentage of Colorado's alumni, business, and general culture gravitating toward California. The PAC made sense in that scenario. What does Iowa State share with the rest of the SEC? I'm not sure there is anything noteworthy.

Let me think on this more and come back with an actual solution or decision. I'm still heartbroken that UNC and Oklahoma doesn't look possible any longer.

I'm right there with you which is why I would still prefer a Carolina and Virginia school. Look, the two most SEC like schools out there besides Oklahoma would be Florida State and Clemson. They are like the two tribes of the half brothers of Joseph stuck on the outside of the Jordan river who in spite of their relationship and family fit don't get to cross into the promised land. At some point you have to wonder with the economy heading in the direction it is (ominous) why we aren't looking closer to home for games that fill the seats. But since we passed and the GOR was signed I guess they are off of the table. That's why I posted earlier, and He1nous thought I was being difficult, that if we don't get Oklahoma I'm not sure I want anybody from the remainder of the Big 12.

Iowa State was mentioned only because the are AAU and solidly funded.
They are unquestionably an outlier with little cultural fit. But, Kansas State is also a lack for cultural fit. Does West Virginia's unique culture really fit the SEC? They have a rabid football first fan base and that's a plus. But culturally I think it ends there. I think they fit better than Kansas State or Iowa State, but not as well as T.C.U., Baylor, or either of the Oklahoma's. So when you've thought about it let me know what you are thinking. The reason my choice was the two Oklahoma's is because they are 10th, and 25th overall in profitability in the NCAA and because they both have acceptable average attendance, and some name recognition.

Here is the 10th End game:

-The P5 get together and agree to reduce down to 4 conferences but with 18 members each consisting of 3x6 divisions for a total of 72 members.

-They agree the B12 being in the middle of the country shall be totally redistributed to the coasts and the ACC will continue to exist and not be raided to death but will give up several key units in exchange.


PAC
UT/OU/OSU/TT/KSU/ISU
UU/CU/ASU/UA/USC/UCLA
Cal/Stan/UO/OSU/UW/WSU

B1G
NU/KU/UIA/UWI/UMN/NW
UMD/UVA/UNC/Duke/RU/PSU
UIL/PU/IU/MSU/UM/tOSU

ACC
USF/Mia/GT/CU/WF/ECU
Cin/UL/UConn/Pitt/SU/BC
BU/TCU/SMU/UH/Rice/Tulane

SEC
A&M/LSU/Ark/MU/UMS/MSU
UF/FSU/UGA/USC/UK/NCSU
UA/AU/UT/VU/VT/WVU

Each conference has a 2 game tournament where the #2 & #3 champs play in to face #1 who gets a first round bye.

the 4 winners engage in a 2 round playoff and we have a national title winner after only playing 3-4 games.

(08-14-2013 07:01 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Here is the 10th End game:

-The P5 get together and agree to reduce down to 4 conferences but with 18 members each consisting of 3x6 divisions for a total of 72 members.

-They agree the B12 being in the middle of the country shall be totally redistributed to the coasts and the ACC will continue to exist and not be raided to death but will give up several key units in exchange.


PAC
UT/OU/OSU/TT/KSU/ISU
UU/CU/ASU/UA/USC/UCLA
Cal/Stan/UO/OSU/UW/WSU

B1G
NU/KU/UIA/UWI/UMN/NW
UMD/UVA/UNC/Duke/RU/PSU
UIL/PU/IU/MSU/UM/tOSU

ACC
USF/Mia/GT/CU/WF/ECU
Cin/UL/UConn/Pitt/SU/BC
BU/TCU/SMU/UH/Rice/Tulane

SEC
A&M/LSU/Ark/MU/UMS/MSU
UF/FSU/UGA/USC/UK/NCSU
UA/AU/UT/VU/VT/WVU

Each conference has a 2 game tournament where the #2 & #3 champs play in to face #1 who gets a first round bye.

the 4 winners engage in a 2 round playoff and we have a national title winner after only playing 3-4 games.

I like your SEC. That's a strong 18 competition and markets wise.