(12-06-2020 01:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Recently ESPN discussed the 25th anniversary of the last day of college football in the old Southwest Conference (https://csnbbs.com/thread-911865.html). The SWC was a casualty of a chain of realignment moves that lasted throughout the decade that changed college sports and college football dramatically.

Back in the 1980's, many major college football teams, especially in the East, still were independent and the Big East did not sponsor football. I graduated from high school in 1991. At that time,

The Big 10 literally had 10 teams. For those of you here who are too young to remember, I'm not kidding!

There was a conference called the Big 8! And they add, get this, 8 teams!

You know who else had 8 teams? The ACC!

By the end of the decade, there was a whole new college football/college sports world. We can discuss the moves and the long term effects.

SEC:
Invited Arkansas and South Carolina and introduced the football conference championship game. They made 12 the "magic number". Interestingly it took until 1996 (Big 12) for another conference to follow suit. The MAC followed in 1997 but the next "power" conference to do so was the ACC in 2005. The Big Ten and Pac-12 didn't get championship games until 2011.

In the ESPN article, former Arkansas football HC mentioned that the SEC had eyes on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State, saying " Roy Kramer was going for the whole enchilada now. He was going for all the television markets because that's all it was about. It was about television. It was about going to get the TV contract and sharing the revenue."

No offense to Arkansas and South Carolina but when you have your sights set on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State and come back with Arkansas and South Carolina, you don't look really good. The SEC did of course get their championship game and in the 2010's eventually got Texas A&M anyway. But if they were able to get the schools back then, maybe South Carolina isn't in the SEC right now. What combinations could they have gotten between the schools?

Big Ten:
Invited Penn State. I'm of course biased but the move expanded the Big Ten's presence on the East Coast and gave PSU rivals with Ohio State and Michigan and the Big Ten a trio of top and popular teams rather than the old pair of just OSU and Michigan. Back then, Wisconsin wasn't the Wisconsin today although Iowa was better. The Big Ten right now paid their conference members on average the most revenue in college sports, more than the SEC. Once the SEC gets away from their bargain SEC on CBS contract the SEC will take the lead but who knows maybe the Big Ten will get a bump too? But I believe the Big Ten's popularity wouldn't have been as great without Penn State.

In the 90's, they could have added a 12th team along with Penn State. They could have easily added Pittsburgh who could have been PSU's rival in the conference. Or they could have brought in Syracuse who in 1987 went 11-0-1, tying Auburn in the 1988 Sugar Bowl and would have given the Big Ten another Eastern state along with Pennsylvania and Syracuse would have helped the Big Ten's presence in New York City, especially during men's basketball season. For years, Penn State was an Eastern team on an island and to the day many old school Big Ten fans still think we don't belong in the Big Ten. Had they brought another Eastern school along with Penn State back in the 1990's, maybe that attitude changes. The Big Ten also gets their conference championship game. The SEC Championship Game was a big winner for them. The Big Ten was a good 20 years too late and it hurt us. All we needed was a 12th team to get one. What would the landscape/dynamic between the Big Ten and SEC be if the Big Ten Championship Game started in the 1990's? What if Penn State had their Eastern rival in the 90's instead of being an island for over two decades? I would say they could have always brought in Notre Dame but it's obvious they tried and weren't interested.

ACC:
Introduced Florida State. People have said Duke and North Carolina were against expansion and cared more about (men's) basketball than football (still do). The move put the ACC on the football map and gave them a presence in Florida which they still have today. At the time Miami went to the Big East instead but in 2004 Miami eventually came to the ACC. Unfortunately for the ACC, they got Miami too late as all of Miami's great teams were during their Big East days. It would have been a scary ACC had they been able to get both Florida State and Miami at the same time when both teams were at their peak. I don't know of the negotiations between both Florida State and Miami and the SEC. From what I read, Florida State turned down the SEC. I'm not sure about Miami. Today any team turning down the SEC would be insane. It tells you how much different the world was back in the early 90's.

Big East:
The 80's Big East most remember was a nine team conference with Boston College, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse playing "major" college football. Then the Big East was able to convince Miami to join as a full member in all sports and then started a football conference with four other football only members: Rutgers, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia. The conference then gave Rutgers and West Virginia the go ahead to become full members in 1995, followed by Virginia Tech in 2000. Of course Temple never got full membership and instead got the boot in football. I still hold a grudge towards the Big East for that. Certainly the Big Ten and/or ACC could have had Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and/or Miami. If that happens, maybe the Big East never tries their hand at football and a "Metro" football conference forms instead with the likes of the Big East football members, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

Big 12:
Finally the Big 8 becomes the Big 12 by adding four members.

quo vadis said at the other thread "The irony is that what ESPN should be writing about is the 25th anniversary of the last games of the Big 8. Because even though formally the SWC was dissolving and four members were joining the Big 8 to form the Big 12, what the passage of time has shown is that in the most important senses, culturally and economically, it is the culture and spirit of the SWC that has come to characterize the Big 12 and it is the essence of the Big 8 that has been lost. The Big 8 thought it was swallowing the SWC, but the opposite happened. That's why Colorado and Nebraska fled a decade ago."

jedclampett wrote at a different thread: https://csnbbs.com/thread-911884-post-17135400.html#pid17135400

"The Big 8 had a regional identity.

Adding the Texas schools was a mistake (and it screwed over UH, SMU, & Rice).

Now, it's the Texas schools, the remaining Big 8's and........WVU (?)

The SWC would have been better off staying together.

It was the most colossally disastrous realignment in the history of college sports.

The whole thing was bungled."

Of the five conferences that made changes in the 1990's (the then Pac-10 stood pat), the Big 12 would have to be considered a lot more unsuccessful than the Big Ten, SEC, and ACC (the Big Ten and SEC haven't lost any members and the ACC only lost Maryland). The Big East as a football conference also failed (or today you can argue it's the AAC but no Miami, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, or Boston College).

The then Pac-10 stood pat in the 1990's but there was rumors that Texas was going there. Would they have had a "Pac 11" or would Colorado have joined and made it 12? Would Texas have gone to the SEC with Texas A&M? If the Texas politicians hadn't kept their butts out where they didn't belong, how about a 10 team "Big 8" (they'd have no reason to call it Big 12 and they obviously couldn't have called it "Big 10") with just Texas and Texas A&M? Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Missouri might still be there today. Blame Bob Bullock. You can argue he single handily ruined 1990's college realignment.

Use this thread to play more "what if's" to your heart's content:)

(12-06-2020 01:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  Jim Delany ruined it. He had everybody chasing after the Joneses. The original Big 12 was a great conference. It could have survived just fine without Colorado. But when Nebraska and Texas A&M left, it put the Big 12 clearly behind the Big 10 and SEC financially.

(12-06-2020 01:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Recently ESPN discussed the 25th anniversary of the last day of college football in the old Southwest Conference (https://csnbbs.com/thread-911865.html). The SWC was a casualty of a chain of realignment moves that lasted throughout the decade that changed college sports and college football dramatically.

Back in the 1980's, many major college football teams, especially in the East, still were independent and the Big East did not sponsor football. I graduated from high school in 1991. At that time,

The Big 10 literally had 10 teams. For those of you here who are too young to remember, I'm not kidding!

There was a conference called the Big 8! And they add, get this, 8 teams!

You know who else had 8 teams? The ACC!

By the end of the decade, there was a whole new college football/college sports world. We can discuss the moves and the long term effects.

SEC:
Invited Arkansas and South Carolina and introduced the football conference championship game. They made 12 the "magic number". Interestingly it took until 1996 (Big 12) for another conference to follow suit. The MAC followed in 1997 but the next "power" conference to do so was the ACC in 2005. The Big Ten and Pac-12 didn't get championship games until 2011.

In the ESPN article, former Arkansas football HC mentioned that the SEC had eyes on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State, saying " Roy Kramer was going for the whole enchilada now. He was going for all the television markets because that's all it was about. It was about television. It was about going to get the TV contract and sharing the revenue."

No offense to Arkansas and South Carolina but when you have your sights set on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State and come back with Arkansas and South Carolina, you don't look really good. The SEC did of course get their championship game and in the 2010's eventually got Texas A&M anyway. But if they were able to get the schools back then, maybe South Carolina isn't in the SEC right now. What combinations could they have gotten between the schools?

Big Ten:
Invited Penn State. I'm of course biased but the move expanded the Big Ten's presence on the East Coast and gave PSU rivals with Ohio State and Michigan and the Big Ten a trio of top and popular teams rather than the old pair of just OSU and Michigan. Back then, Wisconsin wasn't the Wisconsin today although Iowa was better. The Big Ten right now paid their conference members on average the most revenue in college sports, more than the SEC. Once the SEC gets away from their bargain SEC on CBS contract the SEC will take the lead but who knows maybe the Big Ten will get a bump too? But I believe the Big Ten's popularity wouldn't have been as great without Penn State.

In the 90's, they could have added a 12th team along with Penn State. They could have easily added Pittsburgh who could have been PSU's rival in the conference. Or they could have brought in Syracuse who in 1987 went 11-0-1, tying Auburn in the 1988 Sugar Bowl and would have given the Big Ten another Eastern state along with Pennsylvania and Syracuse would have helped the Big Ten's presence in New York City, especially during men's basketball season. For years, Penn State was an Eastern team on an island and to the day many old school Big Ten fans still think we don't belong in the Big Ten. Had they brought another Eastern school along with Penn State back in the 1990's, maybe that attitude changes. The Big Ten also gets their conference championship game. The SEC Championship Game was a big winner for them. The Big Ten was a good 20 years too late and it hurt us. All we needed was a 12th team to get one. What would the landscape/dynamic between the Big Ten and SEC be if the Big Ten Championship Game started in the 1990's? What if Penn State had their Eastern rival in the 90's instead of being an island for over two decades? I would say they could have always brought in Notre Dame but it's obvious they tried and weren't interested.

ACC:
Introduced Florida State. People have said Duke and North Carolina were against expansion and cared more about (men's) basketball than football (still do). The move put the ACC on the football map and gave them a presence in Florida which they still have today. At the time Miami went to the Big East instead but in 2004 Miami eventually came to the ACC. Unfortunately for the ACC, they got Miami too late as all of Miami's great teams were during their Big East days. It would have been a scary ACC had they been able to get both Florida State and Miami at the same time when both teams were at their peak. I don't know of the negotiations between both Florida State and Miami and the SEC. From what I read, Florida State turned down the SEC. I'm not sure about Miami. Today any team turning down the SEC would be insane. It tells you how much different the world was back in the early 90's.

Big East:
The 80's Big East most remember was a nine team conference with Boston College, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse playing "major" college football. Then the Big East was able to convince Miami to join as a full member in all sports and then started a football conference with four other football only members: Rutgers, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia. The conference then gave Rutgers and West Virginia the go ahead to become full members in 1995, followed by Virginia Tech in 2000. Of course Temple never got full membership and instead got the boot in football. I still hold a grudge towards the Big East for that. Certainly the Big Ten and/or ACC could have had Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and/or Miami. If that happens, maybe the Big East never tries their hand at football and a "Metro" football conference forms instead with the likes of the Big East football members, Louisville, Cincinnati, and Memphis.

Big 12:
Finally the Big 8 becomes the Big 12 by adding four members.

quo vadis said at the other thread "The irony is that what ESPN should be writing about is the 25th anniversary of the last games of the Big 8. Because even though formally the SWC was dissolving and four members were joining the Big 8 to form the Big 12, what the passage of time has shown is that in the most important senses, culturally and economically, it is the culture and spirit of the SWC that has come to characterize the Big 12 and it is the essence of the Big 8 that has been lost. The Big 8 thought it was swallowing the SWC, but the opposite happened. That's why Colorado and Nebraska fled a decade ago."

jedclampett wrote at a different thread: https://csnbbs.com/thread-911884-post-17135400.html#pid17135400

"The Big 8 had a regional identity.

Adding the Texas schools was a mistake (and it screwed over UH, SMU, & Rice).

Now, it's the Texas schools, the remaining Big 8's and........WVU (?)

The SWC would have been better off staying together.

It was the most colossally disastrous realignment in the history of college sports.

The whole thing was bungled."

Of the five conferences that made changes in the 1990's (the then Pac-10 stood pat), the Big 12 would have to be considered a lot more unsuccessful than the Big Ten, SEC, and ACC (the Big Ten and SEC haven't lost any members and the ACC only lost Maryland). The Big East as a football conference also failed (or today you can argue it's the AAC but no Miami, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, or Boston College).

The then Pac-10 stood pat in the 1990's but there was rumors that Texas was going there. Would they have had a "Pac 11" or would Colorado have joined and made it 12? Would Texas have gone to the SEC with Texas A&M? If the Texas politicians hadn't kept their butts out where they didn't belong, how about a 10 team "Big 8" (they'd have no reason to call it Big 12 and they obviously couldn't have called it "Big 10") with just Texas and Texas A&M? Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Missouri might still be there today. Blame Bob Bullock. You can argue he single handily ruined 1990's college realignment.

Use this thread to play more "what if's" to your heart's content:)

(12-06-2020 02:30 PM)Scoochpooch1 Wrote:  What if leagues were alerted to PSU's institutional pedophilia program sooner? Hate to bring that up, but it needs to be included in every What-If involving PSU. Maybe the school would have been shutdown like it should be now. So a lot of your post is moot.

(12-06-2020 01:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Recently ESPN discussed the 25th anniversary of the last day of college football in the old Southwest Conference (https://csnbbs.com/thread-911865.html). The SWC was a casualty of a chain of realignment moves that lasted throughout the decade that changed college sports and college football dramatically.

Back in the 1980's, many major college football teams, especially in the East, still were independent and the Big East did not sponsor football. I graduated from high school in 1991. At that time,

The Big 10 literally had 10 teams. For those of you here who are too young to remember, I'm not kidding!

There was a conference called the Big 8! And they add, get this, 8 teams!

You know who else had 8 teams? The ACC!

By the end of the decade, there was a whole new college football/college sports world. We can discuss the moves and the long term effects.

SEC:
Invited Arkansas and South Carolina and introduced the football conference championship game. They made 12 the "magic number". Interestingly it took until 1996 (Big 12) for another conference to follow suit. The MAC followed in 1997 but the next "power" conference to do so was the ACC in 2005. The Big Ten and Pac-12 didn't get championship games until 2011.

In the ESPN article, former Arkansas football HC mentioned that the SEC had eyes on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State, saying " Roy Kramer was going for the whole enchilada now. He was going for all the television markets because that's all it was about. It was about television. It was about going to get the TV contract and sharing the revenue."

No offense to Arkansas and South Carolina but when you have your sights set on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State and come back with Arkansas and South Carolina, you don't look really good. The SEC did of course get their championship game and in the 2010's eventually got Texas A&M anyway. But if they were able to get the schools back then, maybe South Carolina isn't in the SEC right now. What combinations could they have gotten between the schools?

Quote:Big Ten:
Invited Penn State. I'm of course biased but the move expanded the Big Ten's presence on the East Coast and gave PSU rivals with Ohio State and Michigan and the Big Ten a trio of top and popular teams rather than the old pair of just OSU and Michigan. Back then, Wisconsin wasn't the Wisconsin today although Iowa was better. The Big Ten right now paid their conference members on average the most revenue in college sports, more than the SEC. Once the SEC gets away from their bargain SEC on CBS contract the SEC will take the lead but who knows maybe the Big Ten will get a bump too? But I believe the Big Ten's popularity wouldn't have been as great without Penn State.

In the 90's, they could have added a 12th team along with Penn State. They could have easily added Pittsburgh who could have been PSU's rival in the conference. Or they could have brought in Syracuse who in 1987 went 11-0-1, tying Auburn in the 1988 Sugar Bowl and would have given the Big Ten another Eastern state along with Pennsylvania and Syracuse would have helped the Big Ten's presence in New York City, especially during men's basketball season. For years, Penn State was an Eastern team on an island and to the day many old school Big Ten fans still think we don't belong in the Big Ten. Had they brought another Eastern school along with Penn State back in the 1990's, maybe that attitude changes. The Big Ten also gets their conference championship game. The SEC Championship Game was a big winner for them. The Big Ten was a good 20 years too late and it hurt us. All we needed was a 12th team to get one. What would the landscape/dynamic between the Big Ten and SEC be if the Big Ten Championship Game started in the 1990's? What if Penn State had their Eastern rival in the 90's instead of being an island for over two decades? I would say they could have always brought in Notre Dame but it's obvious they tried and weren't interested.

Quote:ACC:
Introduced Florida State. People have said Duke and North Carolina were against expansion and cared more about (men's) basketball than football (still do). The move put the ACC on the football map and gave them a presence in Florida which they still have today. At the time Miami went to the Big East instead but in 2004 Miami eventually came to the ACC. Unfortunately for the ACC, they got Miami too late as all of Miami's great teams were during their Big East days. It would have been a scary ACC had they been able to get both Florida State and Miami at the same time when both teams were at their peak. I don't know of the negotiations between both Florida State and Miami and the SEC. From what I read, Florida State turned down the SEC. I'm not sure about Miami. Today any team turning down the SEC would be insane. It tells you how much different the world was back in the early 90's.

(12-06-2020 02:03 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Don’t blame Delany. A major independent decided they wanted the security of a conference and Delany, Jordan, and that Illinois president whose name escapes me made it happened.

If we want to talk about a turning point that changed the nature of the game it was the SEC taking Arkansas, a member of an established conference.

Prior to that, there appeared to be a gentleman’s agreement to not steal members from a peer conference. Promoting a school up from a lower league was different and happened on occasion(The Big 8 did it with Colorado and Oklahoma St; the SWC did it with TTU; the PAC 8 did it with the AZ schools; Houston and Mich St were independents when they got “promoted”).

I get why they took Arkansas and why Arkansas wanted out. The SWC had a lot of internal strife. The private schools were BAD and when a school was good in the SWC probation usually followed.

It might have looked better had Arkansas left, played a season or two as an independent, and then joined the SEC. After the Arkansas move the precedent was set. The Big 8 felt ok with the partial merger that created the Big 8; the ACC was ok with fitting the Big East; and in the 2010s the PAC 10, Big Ten, ACC, SEC, and Big 12 were all guilty of it.

(12-06-2020 06:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The ironic thing to me was the Big Metro idea. Now obviously South Carolina and Florida State were not going to join with the options they had but the Big Metro teams did meet and it appeared that things might come together with the alliance but Louisville took what today we call a Texas approach. They wanted limited revenue sharing and they didn't want to commit to playing more than 6 league games so they could pursue a national schedule and they weren't crazy about being tied to whatever bowl would be available because most bowls still had one or both sides at-large. The Big East was content to see their members join football only because it would save them hassles and there was concern among the hoops members that some schools they deemed undesirable getting brand advantage by being Big East even if it were football only.

Once the deal fell apart, the Big East stepped up and soon enough Louisville was pursuing Big East because of the bowl coalition, bowl alliance and BCS.

(12-06-2020 06:40 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-06-2020 06:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The ironic thing to me was the Big Metro idea. Now obviously South Carolina and Florida State were not going to join with the options they had but the Big Metro teams did meet and it appeared that things might come together with the alliance but Louisville took what today we call a Texas approach. They wanted limited revenue sharing and they didn't want to commit to playing more than 6 league games so they could pursue a national schedule and they weren't crazy about being tied to whatever bowl would be available because most bowls still had one or both sides at-large. The Big East was content to see their members join football only because it would save them hassles and there was concern among the hoops members that some schools they deemed undesirable getting brand advantage by being Big East even if it were football only.

Once the deal fell apart, the Big East stepped up and soon enough Louisville was pursuing Big East because of the bowl coalition, bowl alliance and BCS.

The trouble with the Metro 16 was it was simply too big, and, since it was sponsored by the Metro, it included a lot of schools that weren’t going to be big football contributors. Had you started with a core of Florida St, Miami, SC, and WVU and built around that with conceivably football only memberships for the Big East’s 3 schools and a total of just 8-10 football programs it might have worked.

(12-06-2020 05:51 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Let's see how many people remember this.

A long time ago, Big East football's primary contract was with CBS. Here's Miami's 2000 football schedule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Miami_Hurricanes_football_team. Miami played Florida State (non conference), Virginia Tech, and Boston College on CBS.

Then Big East football moved to ABC/ESPN and CBS was left with only the SEC. Then CBS decided to advertise the "SEC on CBS" and the SEC Championship Game moved to CBS full time in 2001. If you think ESPN cheerleads the SEC, how about what CBS has been doing for two decades now? The SEC gets a guaranteed over the air slot for its #1 game each week at the same time most weeks (occasionally they move it to prime time). What other conference advertises that? Remember in the 90's the Florida Gators were the last of the Big Three in the state to win a national championship. Miami first broke through in 1983 and Florida State in 1994. It's pretty easy to argue that at the beginning of the 1990's the SEC had the weakest football member of the three. Today Florida by far is the best and you can argue UCF is better than Florida State or Miami (OK Miami is having a good year this year).

What led to the SEC dominating college football on the field and gave Florida the edge over Florida State and Miami? In Florida State, Bobby Bowden retired helped. But Miami had four different head coaches win national championships and if Miami was chosen over Florida State in 2000 it could have been five. You can say the SEC Championship Game helped the conference but that has been around since 1992 and it wasn't until the late 2000's when the SEC run of national championships started (2006 Florida kicked off seven in a row). I think the "SEC on CBS" is underrated in giving the conference exposure that the other conferences don't have. As a Big Ten fan, I want that. I have to check each week when Ohio State and/or Penn State is playing and on what network and at least once this year the Big Ten's top game was dumped to FS1 in favor of the Big 12. I remember one year Penn State and Michigan played on ESPN. Every big Alabama or Georgia game will be on CBS.

And shortly after the Big East signed that ABC/ESPN contract, Miami heads to the Big East. Coincidence? The Big East did what everyone does, takes the largest dollar value. But there is a nice value with being the "only show in town" and the SEC certainly gained by having a monopoly with CBS. Their current contract with CBS is way low but SEC teams are still cleaning up nicely revenue wise. It's nice to have one and sometimes two teams in the CFP and three or four teams in NY6 bowls every year. They'll definitely make more money over with ESPN/ABC but what will their scheduling be like? Will ESPN/ABC cheerlead for them like CBS does now? What happens if ESPN gets the Big Ten's 1st tier rights and all of a sudden they have to advertise Michigan/Ohio State and the Iron Bowl the same week? CBS doesn't have that issue now.

Maybe the SEC got CBS all to themselves by accident. But they certainly took advantage of it.

(12-06-2020 08:24 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(12-06-2020 06:40 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-06-2020 06:27 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The ironic thing to me was the Big Metro idea. Now obviously South Carolina and Florida State were not going to join with the options they had but the Big Metro teams did meet and it appeared that things might come together with the alliance but Louisville took what today we call a Texas approach. They wanted limited revenue sharing and they didn't want to commit to playing more than 6 league games so they could pursue a national schedule and they weren't crazy about being tied to whatever bowl would be available because most bowls still had one or both sides at-large. The Big East was content to see their members join football only because it would save them hassles and there was concern among the hoops members that some schools they deemed undesirable getting brand advantage by being Big East even if it were football only.

Once the deal fell apart, the Big East stepped up and soon enough Louisville was pursuing Big East because of the bowl coalition, bowl alliance and BCS.

The trouble with the Metro 16 was it was simply too big, and, since it was sponsored by the Metro, it included a lot of schools that weren’t going to be big football contributors. Had you started with a core of Florida St, Miami, SC, and WVU and built around that with conceivably football only memberships for the Big East’s 3 schools and a total of just 8-10 football programs it might have worked.

The problem I think is more fundamental. There are 5-6 conferences that match the 5-6 cultures of people in the United States. Only by being in one of those conferences are you "settled" and at home.

You have the Tidewater/Eastern Upper South (ACC) - the Heart is Greensboro to Richmond)

You have the Midwest (B10) - the heart is Chicago
You have the South (SEC) - the heart is Birmingham
You have the West Coast (P12) - the heart is SF
You have the Plains (Big 8) - the heart was Kansas City
You have Texas (SWC) - the heart was Dallas
You have the Northeast (Big East) - the heart was NYC to Philly
You have the Rocky Mountains (MW) - the heart was SLC

Constructs like the Metro are not natural so they do not survive well. The Northeast turned it's back on college sports and the only natural, cultural group was too elite to continue (the Ivy League). Modern farming methods decimated the relative populations of the Plains they could not survive on their own. Too much ego in Texas meant certain entities could not co-exist. The Rockies still are not populated enough to be a discrete cultural region. It's difficult to survive and thrive outside your cultural region because your value systems are different.

(12-06-2020 02:48 PM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-06-2020 01:01 PM)schmolik Wrote:  Recently ESPN discussed the 25th anniversary of the last day of college football in the old Southwest Conference (https://csnbbs.com/thread-911865.html). The SWC was a casualty of a chain of realignment moves that lasted throughout the decade that changed college sports and college football dramatically.

Back in the 1980's, many major college football teams, especially in the East, still were independent and the Big East did not sponsor football. I graduated from high school in 1991. At that time,

The Big 10 literally had 10 teams. For those of you here who are too young to remember, I'm not kidding!

There was a conference called the Big 8! And they add, get this, 8 teams!

You know who else had 8 teams? The ACC!

By the end of the decade, there was a whole new college football/college sports world. We can discuss the moves and the long term effects.

SEC:
Invited Arkansas and South Carolina and introduced the football conference championship game. They made 12 the "magic number". Interestingly it took until 1996 (Big 12) for another conference to follow suit. The MAC followed in 1997 but the next "power" conference to do so was the ACC in 2005. The Big Ten and Pac-12 didn't get championship games until 2011.

In the ESPN article, former Arkansas football HC mentioned that the SEC had eyes on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State, saying " Roy Kramer was going for the whole enchilada now. He was going for all the television markets because that's all it was about. It was about television. It was about going to get the TV contract and sharing the revenue."

No offense to Arkansas and South Carolina but when you have your sights set on Texas, Texas A&M, and Florida State and come back with Arkansas and South Carolina, you don't look really good. The SEC did of course get their championship game and in the 2010's eventually got Texas A&M anyway. But if they were able to get the schools back then, maybe South Carolina isn't in the SEC right now. What combinations could they have gotten between the schools?

Roy Kramer took Arkansas with the hope of getting Texas and Texas A&M in the future. This was the original plan. When both Texas teams declined, the SEC decided to pursue Florida State, who had tried to join unsuccessfully before and had moved on to serious discussions with the ACC. Having failed on all three targets, the University of Georgia stepped in and recommended the University of South Carolina, an old rival, for membership.

Quote:Big Ten:
Invited Penn State. I'm of course biased but the move expanded the Big Ten's presence on the East Coast and gave PSU rivals with Ohio State and Michigan and the Big Ten a trio of top and popular teams rather than the old pair of just OSU and Michigan. Back then, Wisconsin wasn't the Wisconsin today although Iowa was better. The Big Ten right now paid their conference members on average the most revenue in college sports, more than the SEC. Once the SEC gets away from their bargain SEC on CBS contract the SEC will take the lead but who knows maybe the Big Ten will get a bump too? But I believe the Big Ten's popularity wouldn't have been as great without Penn State.

In the 90's, they could have added a 12th team along with Penn State. They could have easily added Pittsburgh who could have been PSU's rival in the conference. Or they could have brought in Syracuse who in 1987 went 11-0-1, tying Auburn in the 1988 Sugar Bowl and would have given the Big Ten another Eastern state along with Pennsylvania and Syracuse would have helped the Big Ten's presence in New York City, especially during men's basketball season. For years, Penn State was an Eastern team on an island and to the day many old school Big Ten fans still think we don't belong in the Big Ten. Had they brought another Eastern school along with Penn State back in the 1990's, maybe that attitude changes. The Big Ten also gets their conference championship game. The SEC Championship Game was a big winner for them. The Big Ten was a good 20 years too late and it hurt us. All we needed was a 12th team to get one. What would the landscape/dynamic between the Big Ten and SEC be if the Big Ten Championship Game started in the 1990's? What if Penn State had their Eastern rival in the 90's instead of being an island for over two decades? I would say they could have always brought in Notre Dame but it's obvious they tried and weren't interested.

They could have tried to get Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh was not interested. It sounds crazy, but Rutgers or Temple might have come to give PSU that eastern rival. Maybe the Big Ten should have given Maryland a look back then. Long story short, there was not a whole lot of candidates to choose from back then. Unless,... the Big Ten was willing to take a gamble on Virginia Tech!! But with no rivalries for the Hokies, it definitely would have been a reach.

Quote:ACC:
Introduced Florida State. People have said Duke and North Carolina were against expansion and cared more about (men's) basketball than football (still do). The move put the ACC on the football map and gave them a presence in Florida which they still have today. At the time Miami went to the Big East instead but in 2004 Miami eventually came to the ACC. Unfortunately for the ACC, they got Miami too late as all of Miami's great teams were during their Big East days. It would have been a scary ACC had they been able to get both Florida State and Miami at the same time when both teams were at their peak. I don't know of the negotiations between both Florida State and Miami and the SEC. From what I read, Florida State turned down the SEC. I'm not sure about Miami. Today any team turning down the SEC would be insane. It tells you how much different the world was back in the early 90's.

The SEC was doing too much Texas dreamin' (shameless pun on the song "California Dreamin'") to even give Miami-FL a sniff back then. When they finally did gauge the 'Canes interest, the 'Canes had already moved on from any SEC ambitious.