(11-19-2020 09:00 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 06:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 09:56 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 02:56 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  Both the SEC and the ACC are safe for this coming round. So if there's going to be any possible action by 2026 it would come between the PAC, XII and B1G, and maybe the SEC if certain programs come their way.

I see four distinct possibilities:

- Status quo for the 2026-2038 period. No big change at the P5 level, with a slight possibility of a move up from the G5 (I give that a 10% chance)

- PAC solidifies and then poaches from the XII. Whoever is left may not be appealing enough to the other conferences, depending on who goes out

- PAC solidifies but doesn't get enough economic power to poach. XII has their prime programs leave to the B1G and/or the SEC. Realignment is pretty much done in perpetuity

- The most intriguing possibility is the XII solidifying and then strengthening itself by poaching from the PAC and possibly the B1G (UNL). That would depend on whether Disney sees economic benefit in making the XII a permanent partner, alongside the ACC and SEC. I think the remaining B1G/PAC programs would then collectivize with the goal of maintaining the current academic/athletic model to avoid being overpowered by the ACC/SEC/XII triumvirate. Thus, they create the first superconference in football. I could see three divisions being formed to keep some regional integrity: One for the West; one for the western lakes; and the third for the eastern lakes and East Coast. The names "Pac-8, 10, 12" and "Big Ten" may have to be retired to reflect the new reality

If I have to put percentages to each scenario I would probably do it like this:

Status quo (70%)
XII solidifying; PAC/B1G collectivizing (15%)
PAC safe; B1G and/or SEC raiding XII (10%)
PAC raiding XII (5%)

I love the Big 12 at 10 schools because of the round robin and top 2 teams in the CCG.. Basketball it's even better with home and home games.. But i'm not naive, and i see the gap in money that could be even wider after this round of negotiations (which will be interesting because of covid).

But for the Big 12 to solidify itself, it shouldn't go to 16 schools. Honestly, it would be better at 12. They too would need to shed two schools, WV (because it's isolated), and baylor. This would allow them to add 4 schools AZ, ASU, UTah and hopefully be able to entice NE back into the fold.

You would then have a new North division that would include ou and NE.

North: ISU, KSU, KU, NE, OU, OSU
South: AZ, ASU, TCU, Tech, UT, UTah

I understand that it's unprecedented for a conference to kick out/no re-up with existing schools so maybe it will have to be a 14 school conference.. add WV to the north and BU to the south in that scenario.. This will not bring the conference to the BIG/SEC levels of projected money, but it would be closer to them than the PAC/ACC conferences.

**I chose UTah over CO because at the end of the day..these conferences are for athletics and truth be told, UTah cares about them much more than CO does these days.

I, too, like the Big XII at 10 teams. In fact, I would like nothing more than for all the P5 schools be in a 10 team conference. But that's not happening.

But for a P5 school to move to another P5 conference, they need a reason to do so. And for the life of me, I can't think of a single reason why any current P5 school would want to leave its present conference to sign on with the Big XII. Or for that matter, with the PAC or the ACC either. There are, by contrast, lots of rea$on$ why a school might want to join the SEC or the B1G.

So, unless one of those two conferences want more members, I don't see any movement happening. And both of them would probably be very picky about who they would accept.

Except conferences aren't in complete control over who will be invited. Presidents and media have a huge say as well. The final say falls on the college presidents and they have stakeholders they have to cater to. Yes, the money makes it hard for programs to leave a conference like the Big Ten but 2020 has shown that even stable conferences can have moments of crisis when leadership isn't squaring straight with the fans. Now the Pac-12 has been going through multiple complaints from athletic directors and media people connected to that conference in the past few years.

I think status quo is the most likely outcome because presidents would prefer not to create more disruptions during a very uncertain time. However, if certain programs can no longer contain the revolts from the stakeholders then stuff will happen regardless of what would make more sense. Right now, the potential for more disruptions looks to be originating at two, maybe three more conferences.

But where there is chaos there will be opportunities to stabilize things to where it becomes more interesting. That's where I like my fourth scenario: use the opportunity to get rid of some overhead. The B1G/PAC are only separate because of tradition and geography. Otherwise, the two share a similar philosophy on athletics and academics. If they must then merging into a superconference consisting of 20 AAU institutions is doable and would help those programs stay in the game.

In hard times moves for security make sense, especially when the security looks long term. Remember that many schools are loosing significant operating capital. There is more incentive to move than to ride things out when increases of revenue amounting $20 million a year or more are to be had.

It's true the ACC will miss out on all of this, but the incentive for the Big 12 schools will be strong.

Merging the PAC with the Big 10 is very doable at 20, especially if Nebraska does head to the Big 12. Arizona, the 4 Cali schools Oregon and Washington, Colorado and Utah are all potential candidates.

So which 2 do you leave out? Arizona has the most subsidy and Cal has the poorest ratings.