If you're seeking ideal conference size and the sensible regional affiliations of like-minded institutions, kick the money lender out of the temple. It's the networks who've made a mess of things. Nowadays, how much money a network and school can make is far more important than athletic prowess or stuffy old notions like rivalries.

750 Miles...

I tried looking up the number of schools who have entered Division 1 since the 1999-2000 season, and I had trouble getting a clear answer. I chose 99-00 because that was the year the MW became the 31st D-1 conference.

I did find, though, that between 2000 and 2014, 36 schools joined D-1.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.landgra...division-1

Several more have joined since 2014. Yet in the past 20 years, only 2 new conferences have emerged: the Mountain West, and the Big East/AAC, whichever one you want to call the "new" league.

As a result of what must be over 40 new D-1 schools, conferences are getting larger and larger on the average. Only 1, the Ivy, has 8. 9 is now tiny, whereas that used to be common.

Particularly for the leagues that aren't huge money generators, I think more leagues are going to get "unwieldy," and factions are going to want to break away to become the next Mountain West/Big East/AAC.

Look at some of these one-bid (or few-bid) leagues with huge numbers: C-USA at 14. A-10 at 14. Southland at 13. Perhaps another down the road that swells to high number.

Do you suppose that if the P5 pushes for an expansion to 72 for the NCAA tournament, a new league would have a case to claim an immediate automatic bid like the new Big Rast did? With an expanded tournament, the P5 would still be getting more desired at large bids, just maybe not FOUR more, since one would go to the new 33rd conference.

(04-08-2020 06:22 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I tried looking up the number of schools who have entered Division 1 since the 1999-2000 season, and I had trouble getting a clear answer. I chose 99-00 because that was the year the MW became the 31st D-1 conference.

I did find, though, that between 2000 and 2014, 36 schools joined D-1.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.landgra...division-1

Several more have joined since 2014. Yet in the past 20 years, only 2 new conferences have emerged: the Mountain West, and the Big East/AAC, whichever one you want to call the "new" league.

As a result of what must be over 40 new D-1 schools, conferences are getting larger and larger on the average. Only 1, the Ivy, has 8. 9 is now tiny, whereas that used to be common.

Particularly for the leagues that aren't huge money generators, I think more leagues are going to get "unwieldy," and factions are going to want to break away to become the next Mountain West/Big East/AAC.

Look at some of these one-bid (or few-bid) leagues with huge numbers: C-USA at 14. A-10 at 14. Southland at 13. Perhaps another down the road that swells to high number.

Do you suppose that if the P5 pushes for an expansion to 72 for the NCAA tournament, a new league would have a case to claim an immediate automatic bid like the new Big Rast did? With an expanded tournament, the P5 would still be getting more desired at large bids, just maybe not FOUR more, since one would go to the new 33rd conference.

Do you suppose that if the NCAA were to open the door to a new D-I conference forming as a breakaway from a large "unwieldy" one that only one group of potential breakaways would emerge to claim an autobid? The P5 would prefer fewer autobids, not more.

(04-08-2020 06:27 PM)ken d Wrote:  Do you suppose that if the NCAA were to open the door to a new D-I conference forming as a breakaway from a large "unwieldy" one that only one group of potential breakaways would emerge to claim an autobid? The P5 would prefer fewer autobids, not more.

I don't know where people get the idea that the new continuity rules are an accident.

You get a bunch of academics meeting together talking an issue and they are not going to notice that the continuity of a conference sponsoring competition instead of a continuity of schools playing together, which allowed the WAC to keep its autobid, will tend to be a roadblock to new "airport meeting" conferences?

There is no reason to believe that this was an accidental side-effect of the rules change that saved the WAC from collapse. It is more plausible that it was part of the intended effect: in exchange for a rules change that saved the WAC, which is a risk reduction measure for the conferences in the bottom tier of D1, the P5 got a rule change to reduce the risk of more "airport meeting" conferences being formed.

FOOTBALL - 12

BASKETBALL - 18