This is the Future

It is inevitable that at some point the ACC, SEC, Big-10, and Pac-12 will just take their ball and go form their own version of the NCAA. This will be accomplished shortly after all four go to 16 members by picking off schools from the Big East and Big-12. It will also require that Notre Dame abandons football independence and Texas gives up on the "Longhorn Network" or folds it into a conference's tv deal with equal revenue being shared. I think both will happen once the Irish run out of places to put their basketball in and the longhorns and ESPN get tired of having to beg people to add the Texas channel. If necessary, the other 62 will gently prod them to move by threatening to take someone else along and leaving them behind with the little guys. Then both schools will grab the last 2 seats on the Big School 64-train and off they will go.

The Big-64 association schools will then hold a playoff in football and keep all the revenue for themselves. They will also continue with a playoff for basketball but this time with less teams and without having to share any of the revenue with the likes of Wyoming, Utah State, Eastern Illinois, Vermont, Samford, etc... The teams left behind in the "NCAA" will probably continue to field some sports teams but their limelight days will be gone. It's possible they might even merge with the NAIA as basically the NCAA and NAIA will be relative equals without the big money schools around to provide the big paychecks and to attract the eyes of tv. Well, they might still get some scraps from the big schools by agreeing to play them occasionally on the road for big payouts in football, basketball, baseball, hockey, etc...(Assuming Big-64 Association members would even be willing to schedule anyone outside the "Association" in any sport. Heck, Television contracts might dictate games with other Big-64 Association members only).

The NPAA(National Professional Amateur Association) will have no problems holding playoffs in any of their sports because if necessary they will just do it with less teams. For example, instead of a 68 team basketball playoff it could be just 24 teams but they will make far more money because none of it will have to be shared with the small schools. They might even adopt an NBA style playoff with best-of-3 series matchups instead of single elimination rounds in order to give tv more content and increase their profits. They can do that with all of their sports. The possibilities for playoffs, profits(even secondary sports such as baseball, hockey, soccer, Lacrosse, women's basketball, etc.. could become moneymakers), and different ways of scheduling are endless since they will no longer be members of the NCAA and will be able to make their own rules. It won't really be amateur athletics but amateur athletics in its pure form with true student-athletes died long ago anyway. Might as well take the greed to its logical and ultimate conclusion. Oh, and yes NPAA is my tongue-in-cheek name for an organization that will clearly be for-profit but that will continue to try and portray itself as an innocent amateur sports charity.

The reality is that from the time in the early 90's when Notre Dame signed its tv deal with NBC and the SEC stole Arkansas from the SWC all the events that have occurred since have been leading up to this. Heck, some might even say that the creation of the CFA and the splitting of D-1 football into 1-A and 1-AA, not to mention the NCAA being split into divisions 1, 2 and 3 as well as the allowing of athletics scholarships and televised games long before that, were the first signs that greed would one day lead the big revenue schools to bolt and leave all of the other schools behind. Anyway, when the exodus finally does happen it will be the last cataclysmic event that destroys any semblance of intercollegiate athletics as you once knew them. Then again, for me college sports started changing beyond recognition about 20 years ago so I've already declared "the good old days" to be dead and made peace with the coming apocalypse to the point that I actually welcome it as the proverbial "End of Days" for college sports.

Some say that the government or the courts would come in and stop the greed but then they never came in and stopped the CFA, BCS, or any of the other moves which have been motivated by greed and I doubt they would be willing or able to come in and try to keep the Big-64 from voluntarily leaving the NCAA which is a voluntary organization in itself. Even the remote possibility of being taxed by the IRS won't be a deterrent since they will be making enough money to be able to afford the taxes and the special status they would have by being members of a perceived elite and exclusive 64-school group would feed their enormous egos. Not to mention that they would finally be giving the public their precious "Major Football Playoff" and I can't see any politicians, bureaucrats, or judges with the power or willingness to stop them. A few might make token efforts but most won't even try. Most will be good politicians and support their in-state cash cow and flagship institution. Easily a congressional majority.

What about Temple and Louisville to Big 12?

(01-31-2012 10:19 PM)Scroggins Wrote:  This is the Future

It is inevitable that at some point the ACC, SEC, Big-10, and Pac-12 will just take their ball and go form their own version of the NCAA. This will be accomplished shortly after all four go to 16 members by picking off schools from the Big East and Big-12. It will also require that Notre Dame abandons football independence and Texas gives up on the "Longhorn Network" or folds it into a conference's tv deal with equal revenue being shared. I think both will happen once the Irish run out of places to put their basketball in and the longhorns and ESPN get tired of having to beg people to add the Texas channel. If necessary, the other 62 will gently prod them to move by threatening to take someone else along and leaving them behind with the little guys. Then both schools will grab the last 2 seats on the Big School 64-train and off they will go.

The Big-64 association schools will then hold a playoff in football and keep all the revenue for themselves. They will also continue with a playoff for basketball but this time with less teams and without having to share any of the revenue with the likes of Wyoming, Utah State, Eastern Illinois, Vermont, Samford, etc... The teams left behind in the "NCAA" will probably continue to field some sports teams but their limelight days will be gone. It's possible they might even merge with the NAIA as basically the NCAA and NAIA will be relative equals without the big money schools around to provide the big paychecks and to attract the eyes of tv. Well, they might still get some scraps from the big schools by agreeing to play them occasionally on the road for big payouts in football, basketball, baseball, hockey, etc...(Assuming Big-64 Association members would even be willing to schedule anyone outside the "Association" in any sport. Heck, Television contracts might dictate games with other Big-64 Association members only).

The NPAA(National Professional Amateur Association) will have no problems holding playoffs in any of their sports because if necessary they will just do it with less teams. For example, instead of a 68 team basketball playoff it could be just 24 teams but they will make far more money because none of it will have to be shared with the small schools. They might even adopt an NBA style playoff with best-of-3 series matchups instead of single elimination rounds in order to give tv more content and increase their profits. They can do that with all of their sports. The possibilities for playoffs, profits(even secondary sports such as baseball, hockey, soccer, Lacrosse, women's basketball, etc.. could become moneymakers), and different ways of scheduling are endless since they will no longer be members of the NCAA and will be able to make their own rules. It won't really be amateur athletics but amateur athletics in its pure form with true student-athletes died long ago anyway. Might as well take the greed to its logical and ultimate conclusion. Oh, and yes NPAA is my tongue-in-cheek name for an organization that will clearly be for-profit but that will continue to try and portray itself as an innocent amateur sports charity.

The reality is that from the time in the early 90's when Notre Dame signed its tv deal with NBC and the SEC stole Arkansas from the SWC all the events that have occurred since have been leading up to this. Heck, some might even say that the creation of the CFA and the splitting of D-1 football into 1-A and 1-AA, not to mention the NCAA being split into divisions 1, 2 and 3 as well as the allowing of athletics scholarships and televised games long before that, were the first signs that greed would one day lead the big revenue schools to bolt and leave all of the other schools behind. Anyway, when the exodus finally does happen it will be the last cataclysmic event that destroys any semblance of intercollegiate athletics as you once knew them. Then again, for me college sports started changing beyond recognition about 20 years ago so I've already declared "the good old days" to be dead and made peace with the coming apocalypse to the point that I actually welcome it as the proverbial "End of Days" for college sports.

Some say that the government or the courts would come in and stop the greed but then they never came in and stopped the CFA, BCS, or any of the other moves which have been motivated by greed and I doubt they would be willing or able to come in and try to keep the Big-64 from voluntarily leaving the NCAA which is a voluntary organization in itself. Even the remote possibility of being taxed by the IRS won't be a deterrent since they will be making enough money to be able to afford the taxes and the special status they would have by being members of a perceived elite and exclusive 64-school group would feed their enormous egos. Not to mention that they would finally be giving the public their precious "Major Football Playoff" and I can't see any politicians, bureaucrats, or judges with the power or willingness to stop them. A few might make token efforts but most won't even try. Most will be good politicians and support their in-state cash cow and flagship institution. Easily a congressional majority.

Long post, but this is my fear, but could likely happen. The hunger for more money will drive it.

its all bs the experts said the conferences are settled till 2016. big12 10.
every day you guys talk about louville to the big 12, stop talkin about it for christ sakes.

west virginia is alone, by themselves

(01-31-2012 10:00 PM)Maize Wrote:  Yes the ACC is stable but still not on par with the Big 3-(SEC, B1G & Pac 12).

I am really of two minds about that. On one hand, i appreciate what Tank says about the value of academics to university presidents, and the ACC has an academic rep second to none among AQ conferences. And, no ACC school has ever successfully been poached. I agree with Tank that actual performance on the football field is way-overrated by folks around here as an indicator of conference stability.

That said, the ACC has been willing to add schools that do not add much to its academic profile (like FSU) in order to achieve athletic goals. And my gut tells me the ACC is vulnerable to SEC poaching, particularly with regard to FSU, Miami, and Clemson. The conference also has sprawled well beyond its core footprint, usually a sign of internal instability.

On balance, i include the ACC as being one of the 4 stable AQ conferences, but if you forced me to pick one of those 4 as most likely to become unstable, i would pick the ACC.

(01-31-2012 06:13 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Louisville is hurt by there not being an obvious 12th. If there was another Louisville out there, they'd probably be in already.

I for one don't see an obvious #11. Any school coming in needs to generate a minimum of 25 mil. and even that # only gets each current member another 500k per year.

(02-01-2012 08:13 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 06:13 PM)Frog in the Kitchen Sink Wrote:  Louisville is hurt by there not being an obvious 12th. If there was another Louisville out there, they'd probably be in already.

I for one don't see an obvious #11. Any school coming in needs to generate a minimum of 25 mil. and even that # only gets each current member another 500k per year.

You would be the only one. # 12 is the problem for The Big 12. The reality is The Big East is facing the same issue. Who will be #12? There is no clear #12. Wait until The ACC, Big 10 and SEC start to fill that last spot you'll see the same thing. Just a fact in conference realignment: #10, #12, #14 and #16 are big decisions. For The ACC and Big 10 it means cutting out Notre Dame for good.
CJ

There is certainly a clear #12 for the Big East, and that's Air Force. They've been hot and cold for the past 4 or 5 months, but it appears they may once again be warming up to us. Since Navy can't join till 2015 and our TV negotiations won't start for at least 6 months, I assume we're not moving on from AFA until we're sure they're not interested.

We may also be working on a different #11 & #12, so that we'll have a CCS before 2015, and Navy & AFA will be #13 & #14.

(02-01-2012 08:44 AM)SmallVoice Wrote:  There is certainly a clear #12 for the Big East, and that's Air Force. They've been hot and cold for the past 4 or 5 months, but it appears they may once again be warming up to us. Since Navy can't join till 2015 and our TV negotiations won't start for at least 6 months, I assume we're not moving on from AFA until we're sure they're not interested.

We may also be working on a different #11 & #12, so that we'll have a CCS before 2015, and Navy & AFA will be #13 & #14.

Certainly and Clear are two words that should never be used in the same sentence with The Big East. Those of us that have been here any length of time watching this can attest. When it comes to Big East expansion nothing is ever certain or clear.
CJ

East Carolina, Temple and Memphis all make more sense for the Big East.

(01-31-2012 07:35 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 05:01 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  However, a bigger advantage would be with 12 schools the league would be in a much stronger position to ward off any future expansion worries if/when there is another wave of expansion from the other power leagues. With 12 teams, the Big 12 would be in a position of strength.

WTF? The Big12 WAS at 12 teams and had just signed a BIG television/media deal, and yet saw 4 of those 12 teams poached by rival AQ conferences. Why? Because whether the "Big 12" has 8, 10, 12, 14, or 16 teams, it is INHERENTLY an UNSTABLE conference, and everyone knows it.

The core of the Big12 is shaky, and that's why it will inevitably fall apart.

Agree Quo

I've said before...big east has a gushing wound. B12 has a slow drip....both will bleed to death

So i dont get too jacked about B12 rumors....it will be were the big east is now sooner or later

This article like most of the Conference Expansion Articles is BS. It will remain a BS story until a school is officially announced and actually begins to play in their new conference.

I hate these someone heard a fart in the dark rumor mill where someone else smells it and states they know who dealt it. Sigh......

(01-31-2012 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 07:58 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  Though I'm against Louisville going to the Big 12, I am at least ready to admit I was wrong about some of the instability I was attributing to that conference.

The Big 12 is unstable for both internal and external reasons. The SEC, PAC, and B1G may very well not be finished expanding, and if they do expand, Big 12 teams are likely to once again be on the menu.

Furthermore, internally, there is a fundamental tension between the interests of Texas and the interests of all the other Big 12 schools save Oklahoma, and that's because Texas is far more valuable an athletic AND academic property than those schools. You don't see that situation in the really stable conferences, the SEC, B1G, and PAC.

This is why I enjoy posting with you. Sometimes, you hit the nail right on the head. This time, you've done just that. And say what you will, but I think the Big East is more stable than the Big 12, and it's all because of Texas.

(02-01-2012 02:49 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I've said before...big east has a gushing wound. B12 has a slow drip....both will bleed to death

Yep.

From what I've seen/heard by "experts" and people "in-the-know" here in Dallas is that Louisville is a viable Big XII candidate. Oklahoma supports Louisville's entry in the conference. The disagreement comes what school will follow Louisville in the Big XII. Some schools want BYU, others want Rutgers or UConn in the conference. Another scenario would be to invite BYU as a FB only member and invite Notre Dame for basketball and Olympic sports.

The Big XII will expand, it's not a question of if it's just when. The Big XII will remain a power conference as long as UT and OU are members and the additions of WVU and TCU made the league stronger. Don't think for a moment that the Big XII will be happy to stay at 10 while the Big Ten, ACC, SEC and Pac-12 get all the attention during CCG weekend. I'm sure Jerry Jones will be more than happy to see the Big XII CCG back at Cowboys Stadium.

As for the poster who said the Big XII is not interested in expansion, that's not the case. The Big XII said over and over they would not take any Texas team because they were interested in new TV markets. They did the opposite by inviting TCU. Chuck Neinas is not interested in being the Big XII commish for long and C-USA's Britton Banowski is one of the frontrunners. If BB becomes the new Big XII commish, I don't think he'll have any sympathy for the Big East, a conference that raided C-USA twice. He won't have to move far either since the Big XII and C-USA's headquarters are across SH 114 in Irving.

(02-01-2012 06:24 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 07:58 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  Though I'm against Louisville going to the Big 12, I am at least ready to admit I was wrong about some of the instability I was attributing to that conference.

The Big 12 is unstable for both internal and external reasons. The SEC, PAC, and B1G may very well not be finished expanding, and if they do expand, Big 12 teams are likely to once again be on the menu.

Furthermore, internally, there is a fundamental tension between the interests of Texas and the interests of all the other Big 12 schools save Oklahoma, and that's because Texas is far more valuable an athletic AND academic property than those schools. You don't see that situation in the really stable conferences, the SEC, B1G, and PAC.

This is why I enjoy posting with you. Sometimes, you hit the nail right on the head. This time, you've done just that. And say what you will, but I think the Big East is more stable than the Big 12, and it's all because of Texas.

In the long run, i see Texas as being in either the B1G, the SEC, or as an independent. Texas dominates not only the Big 12, it would also dominate the ACC or PAC as well, because it would still be much stronger than the other schools in those conferences too. The B1G and SEC are the only conferences with enough fellow top-shelf powerhouses to truly have Texas fit in as "one of the pack", although even in those conferences it would be in the top tier for sure and probably still the strongest.

But in the SEC or B1G, it wouldn't be the case that Texas is stronger than any 5-6 other conference members put together, as is the case in the Big 12.

(02-01-2012 08:56 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-01-2012 06:24 PM)GeminiShamrock Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 08:58 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-31-2012 07:58 PM)SmallVoice Wrote:  Though I'm against Louisville going to the Big 12, I am at least ready to admit I was wrong about some of the instability I was attributing to that conference.

The Big 12 is unstable for both internal and external reasons. The SEC, PAC, and B1G may very well not be finished expanding, and if they do expand, Big 12 teams are likely to once again be on the menu.

Furthermore, internally, there is a fundamental tension between the interests of Texas and the interests of all the other Big 12 schools save Oklahoma, and that's because Texas is far more valuable an athletic AND academic property than those schools. You don't see that situation in the really stable conferences, the SEC, B1G, and PAC.

This is why I enjoy posting with you. Sometimes, you hit the nail right on the head. This time, you've done just that. And say what you will, but I think the Big East is more stable than the Big 12, and it's all because of Texas.

In the long run, i see Texas as being in either the B1G, the SEC, or as an independent. Texas dominates not only the Big 12, it would also dominate the ACC or PAC as well, because it would still be much stronger than the other schools in those conferences too. The B1G and SEC are the only conferences with enough fellow top-shelf powerhouses to truly have Texas fit in as "one of the pack", although even in those conferences it would be in the top tier for sure and probably still the strongest.

But in the SEC or B1G, it wouldn't be the case that Texas is stronger than any 5-6 other conference members put together, as is the case in the Big 12.

I disagree with you on the Pac-12 only in this sense: The conference recently got a TV deal that allowed for more equal sharing among members. That ended up being a big reason why the Orangebloods didn't make the jump. Also, if they did go west, they'd have to deal with emerging football power Oregon as well as USC, which is still the big cheese even though they've been kind of down lately. Other than that, I couldn't agree with you more.

Also, your last statement is very true since I'm reminded of how things were in the Southwest Conference. Even though they weren't necessarily the best team in the league each year, they still ran the show, so much so that they effectively killed what would've been the first true superconference, aka the full SWC-Big 8 merger. That's why I think a school like that in almost any conference is dangerous for that particular league.