(04-01-2017 04:57 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 04:30 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 12:29 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 09:14 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Oklahoma & Kansas goes to the SEC. If they go to 18 then they take 2 of Oklahoma St, TT & WV.

Texas & ND as full members of the ACC. 2 of TCU, Houston, TT, Baylor & Cincinnati come along as well. What Houston, TCU & Cincinnati offer is a vote that wouldn't automatically go with Texas.

The PAC could expand with TT, Houston, Kansas State & Iowa State. The B1G would have UCONN & room for 1 more, who?

PAC
Arizona, Arizona St, TT, Houston

UCLA, Stanford, USC, Cal

Oregon, Oregon St, Wash, Wash St

Colorado, Utah, Kansas St, Iowa St


SEC
Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, A&M

Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State, Kentucky

Florida, Georgia, SC, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, WV


ACC
Texas, ND, TCU, Baylor, Louisville, Miami

FSU, Clemson, Pittsburgh, GT, Syracuse, BC

NC, Duke, Virginia, VT, NC State, WF


B1G
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska, Iowa

Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern

Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Cincinnati (?)

Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers, UCONN

*PSU isn't going to want to play a school w/ 15 years of fbs history in a small, off campus stadium built on a dump. They don't recruit out of CT, and they already have a game in the NYC area for donors every other year. UConn isn't getting a B1G invite like RU and UMD did.

*The B1G isn't going to undercut tOSU by legitimizing another Ohio school.

*Baylor and TCU don't add anything significant to the ACC.

*I don't think that the SEC would want to go past 16 - and that desire for 16 would come as a result of a push for a semifinal ccg for 16 team conferences.

*TT, Houston, KSU, and ISU don't add value to the Pac.

I could see Texas taking a ND deal w/ the ACC (and the ACC splitting Olympic sports into north-south divisions to minimize travel costs of minor sports and/or creating pods: UTex-FSU-Miami-GT/Clemson, Duke-UNC-WF-NCSU, GT/Clemson-UVA-VT-UL, BC-SU-ND-Pitt). I could see the B1G taking Mizzou from the SEC and OU/KU from the Big XII. I could see the SEC taking WVU, OSU, OU/KU

Texas Tech, ISU, Baylor, TCU, and KSU would probably invite Houston, BYU, Cincinnati, and possibly Tulane/Rice/Tulsa, and continue the Big XII.

UConn would probably join the BIG EAST.

In this scenario Baylor & TCU are there as regional partners for Texas. Even as a partial member Texas would want/need regional partners for their Olympic sports & putting them in a southern division without them doesn't cut it. My personal preference there would be Houston & Cincinnati but I think the ACC would be stuck with 2. Why Texas at all? For the $$$. Otherwise bring a combination of Cincinnati, WV, Houston & UCONN with ND.

The SEC could stop at 16 with Oklahoma & Oklahoma St & that would put Kansas & UCONN in the B1G.

Why would the B12 leftovers invite new members when they could make more $ in the PAC? What do they offer the PAC? With the B12 gone, FOX would make a play for the PAC & consolidate their expenses into 1 conference while moving the PAC footprint east. 1/2 ownership of the PACN? Likely included.

If Kansas goes to the SEC then what's left for the B1G? They could be the odd dog & stay at 14 but while the other power conferences are bringing in additional revenue from their expanded conference championships they wouldn't be. UCONN would be a no brainer I think in this scenario. As for the second, did you notice the (?) next to Cincinnati? Their options would be very limited. Cincinnati? Temple? BYU? Other? Stay at 15?

1. Is Texas in an ACC south pod really more geographically burdensome than MIZZOU playing in the SEC East, Washington State/Washington playing in the Pac 10, BC in the ACC, Miami in the BIG EAST, etc? I don't think so. They wouldn't need any additional schools, and the ACC doesn't need to add Texas as a partial. Why would the ACC take on dead weight? Wouldn't that impact every existing ACC school's travel budget. Your assumptions don't look realistic to me.

2. PSU was the driving force behind RU and UMD. Other schools were open to the idea of the adds because UMD Brings value in and of itself, and both areas are good for donors, academic recruiting, and athletic recruiting for existing B1G schools to various degrees. Furthermore, PSU had a credible threat to jump to the ACC.

Those forces don't exist for UConn. So why would the B1G add UConn?

3. The Big XII schools would invite others because the NCAA mandates a minimum of 8 schools, and it wouldn't make sense for the Big XII to blow up the Big XII and lose conference assets.

The Big XII schools couldn't just go to the PAC because they'd need an invite from the PAC first, and that isn't on the table because they don't add significant value to the PAC.

And FOX wouldn't want it to happen because those schools aren't worth the PAC TV deal, and the existing PAC schools aren't going to add any new schools that water down their TV deal. It's cheaper for FOX to just renegotiate the Big XII contract.

4. The B1G was MIZZOU's first choice and dream conference. Why not add MIZZOU if there's an advantage to going to 16? Then there's going to be a free school out of KU, OU, OSU, and WVU. KU and OU would be the obvious favorites, but OSU and WVU are both better adds than Temple, Cincy, etc.

Seriously, why would PSU sign off on Temple? Why would Maryland and Rutgers (for whatever their opinion matters)? Why would tOSU sign off on UC? Why would any other B1G school that recruits Ohio heavily? And why would any B1G school schedule regular football games in CT?

For any move to be realistically plausible, the parties w/ the bargaining power need to win.

1) None of those schools are Texas. They would want them for scheduling purposes. In my scenario Texas & ND are full members. Why take Texas, $$$. With the ACC in 3 divisions of 6, how would it "impact every existing ACC school's travel budget"? The PAC wouldn't likely take TCU or Baylor due to their religious affiliations, hence the ACC being stuck with them.

2) As I said in my last response, the B1G could decide to stay at 14. The only drawback would be that they wouldn't be able to go to multiple divisions & have an extended conference championship. Why UCONN? Who else would be left?

3) In this scenario we have a P4 model for the CFP's so not being in one of the P4's would really make it difficult to make the CFP's. Moving a few teams to the PAC would be cheaper than paying for 2 conferences, incentive for FOX. PACN distribution would be another.

4) I don't think that Missouri will leave the SEC, after a B1G rejection why would they? Kansas could be a possibility, their choice between the SEC & B1G. Academics are huge for the B1G, WV wouldn't have a chance. (Neither would Louisville for that matter.) Kansas & UCONN have the academics. The B1G would have limited options. IIRC, Kansas 2nd tier rights are with ESPN.