But I'm back to run by another scenario.

If a deal is close and Baylor has just done themselves in then what about this?

Scenario 1:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Houston to the PAC

West Virginia and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 2:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech to the SEC

Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, and West Virginia to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 3:

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

TCU, Houston, West Virginia, and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Which do you think is most likely? Do you think any are likely? Do you think another scenario is far more likely?

(05-27-2016 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  But I'm back to run by another scenario.

If a deal is close and Baylor has just done themselves in then what about this?

Scenario 1:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Houston to the PAC

West Virginia and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 2:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech to the SEC

Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, and West Virginia to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 3:

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

TCU, Houston, West Virginia, and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Which do you think is most likely? Do you think any are likely? Do you think another scenario is far more likely?

How about this:

Wake Forest takes a N.D. deal and is a full member of the ACC in everything but football where they get 6 conference games a year. This allows them to schedule so that their bowl chances are better and it frees up a spot.

The ACC turns loose of those duplicated markets so the SEC picks up N.C. State and Virginia Tech anyway. The SEC adds Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stops at 18.

The ACC adds Texas, T.C.U., Kansas State, Iowa State, and Texas Tech. Miami joins them as part of the ACC West.

West Virginia is added to the ACC in the North. The ACC now looks like this:

North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia

West: Iowa State, Kansas State, Miami, T.C.U., Texas, Texas Tech

The ACC picks up 34 million in population, a network, and a massive footprint without losing anything but duplicated properties.

The SEC picks up 24 million in population, and a much higher payday for the SECN, as well as DFW in greater saturation.

ESPN closes out the Big 12 and the SEC and ACC share their bowl revenues and a portion of their CFP money. Both conferences prosper with semis for the Conference Championship.

ESPN locks the Big 10 out of further profitable expansion which insures that the disparity with the ACC cannot grow. The SEC is back on top in earnings.

(05-28-2016 12:12 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-27-2016 10:23 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  But I'm back to run by another scenario.

If a deal is close and Baylor has just done themselves in then what about this?

Scenario 1:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Houston to the PAC

West Virginia and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 2:

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, and Texas Tech to the SEC

Kansas, Iowa State, TCU, and West Virginia to the ACC

-----------------

Scenario 3:

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

TCU, Houston, West Virginia, and Cincinnati to the ACC

-----------------

Which do you think is most likely? Do you think any are likely? Do you think another scenario is far more likely?

How about this:

Wake Forest takes a N.D. deal and is a full member of the ACC in everything but football where they get 6 conference games a year. This allows them to schedule so that their bowl chances are better and it frees up a spot.

The ACC turns loose of those duplicated markets so the SEC picks up N.C. State and Virginia Tech anyway. The SEC adds Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and stops at 18.

The ACC adds Texas, T.C.U., Kansas State, Iowa State, and Texas Tech. Miami joins them as part of the ACC West.

West Virginia is added to the ACC in the North. The ACC now looks like this:

North: Boston College, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia

South: Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia

West: Iowa State, Kansas State, Miami, T.C.U., Texas, Texas Tech

The ACC picks up 34 million in population, a network, and a massive footprint without losing anything but duplicated properties.

The SEC picks up 24 million in population, and a much higher payday for the SECN, as well as DFW in greater saturation.

ESPN closes out the Big 12 and the SEC and ACC share their bowl revenues and a portion of their CFP money. Both conferences prosper with semis for the Conference Championship.

ESPN locks the Big 10 out of further profitable expansion which insures that the disparity with the ACC cannot grow. The SEC is back on top in earnings.

I like it. I just don't see the ACC giving up schools at this juncture.

Where do you have Kansas going? To the B1G with UConn or something like that?

I think the most interesting part of this hypothetical centers around the timing of all of this crap with Baylor.

It makes you wonder what would have happened if something like this had happened in 1992 or so.

(05-28-2016 09:37 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I think the most interesting part of this hypothetical centers around the timing of all of this crap with Baylor.

It makes you wonder what would have happened if something like this had happened in 1992 or so.

Well it did in the late 80's with SMU. It destroyed esprit decor among the SWC and eventually gave them a shove toward their eventual demise. We got Arkansas as a result.

It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

What's the most efficient way to get things done?

It's probably the SEC and ACC teaming up to take 4 each although I'm not convinced the ACC would terribly thrilled with several Plains additions.

My Scenario #1 from the OP would also be an easy way to divide things.

Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, and Iowa State to the SEC

Texas, Texas Tech, TCU, and Houston to the PAC

West Virginia and Cincinnati to the ACC

The problem here is that the B1G is excluded. While I think it is far more likely that Texas goes to the PAC rather than the B1G, the thought of the B1G being completely excluded gives me pause.

What sort of compromise could be palatable to all 4 leagues? What makes the networks pull the trigger?

I feel fairly confident in saying that OU and OSU are coming to the SEC so I'm building every scenario around that right now.

Today was a lot of fun!

I think that the problem with your scenario is picking up a bunch of unnecessary/redundant schools that add little to no value to the SEC (ie OKSU/TTU/ISU)

Oklahoma/Kansas/Florida State/UNC/NC State/Duke/Virginia Tech/Virginia/West Virginia

These are the schools that are going to bring more value than they do headache.

(05-29-2016 07:23 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Today was a lot of fun!

I think that the problem with your scenario is picking up a bunch of unnecessary/redundant schools that add little to no value to the SEC (ie OKSU/TTU/ISU)

Oklahoma/Kansas/Florida State/UNC/NC State/Duke/Virginia Tech/Virginia/West Virginia

These are the schools that are going to bring more value than they do headache.

Congratulations on your SEC tournament championship in Baseball! I thought you had the talent to do it last year. It was nice to see you finish strong.

I don't disagree on any of the above you've listed except West Virginia. They are nowhere near our metrics in academics, # of sports offered (including requisite areas), or venue requirements. Everyone else in the list could get in without much in the way of upgrades.

I see WVU as a "need one more but can't get exactly who we want" pick, particularly if #15 is Virginia Tech

(05-29-2016 09:38 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  I see WVU as a "need one more but can't get exactly who we want" pick, particularly if #15 is Virginia Tech

The problem with that is that if you get Virginia Tech you don't need West Virginia. The Hokies give you almost everything that WVU could give you plus the Tidewater.

(05-29-2016 07:35 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 07:23 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Today was a lot of fun!

I think that the problem with your scenario is picking up a bunch of unnecessary/redundant schools that add little to no value to the SEC (ie OKSU/TTU/ISU)

Oklahoma/Kansas/Florida State/UNC/NC State/Duke/Virginia Tech/Virginia/West Virginia

These are the schools that are going to bring more value than they do headache.

Congratulations on your SEC tournament championship in Baseball! I thought you had the talent to do it last year. It was nice to see you finish strong.

I don't disagree on any of the above you've listed except West Virginia. They are nowhere near our metrics in academics, # of sports offered (including requisite areas), or venue requirements. Everyone else in the list could get in without much in the way of upgrades.

I agree with this.

I think WVU is among the least likely candidates in the nation for inclusion in the SEC.

(05-29-2016 10:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

I guess where I differ is I just don't see 4 power conferences as a goal for any of the powers-that-be. Leaving out a champion or two might suck when your team it out, but the flip side of that is that it creates enormous drama through the season which is great for ratings.

Beyond that, the conferences won't expand for any greater good, it has to be their own good and I just think there are too many Big 12 schools that no one would want. They also are unlikely to be excited about starting up all the difficult divisional discussions and such again (although that is a side issue).

(05-30-2016 08:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

I guess where I differ is I just don't see 4 power conferences as a goal for any of the powers-that-be. Leaving out a champion or two might suck when your team it out, but the flip side of that is that it creates enormous drama through the season which is great for ratings.

Beyond that, the conferences won't expand for any greater good, it has to be their own good and I just think there are too many Big 12 schools that no one would want. They also are unlikely to be excited about starting up all the difficult divisional discussions and such again (although that is a side issue).

I think that's a crucial point and one I agree with completely.

Nothing helps ratings like the talking heads arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, especially when the Angels are worth this kind of cash.

(05-30-2016 08:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

I guess where I differ is I just don't see 4 power conferences as a goal for any of the powers-that-be. Leaving out a champion or two might suck when your team it out, but the flip side of that is that it creates enormous drama through the season which is great for ratings.

Beyond that, the conferences won't expand for any greater good, it has to be their own good and I just think there are too many Big 12 schools that no one would want. They also are unlikely to be excited about starting up all the difficult divisional discussions and such again (although that is a side issue).

When the conferences expand again it will be for leverage, and money. If expansion eliminates the doubt of getting your champion into the CFP revenue pot that will be a nice perk.

I don't think having 4 conferences all of the same size is a goal of the conferences, but having competitive balance is something the networks are interested in maintaining. A semblance of balance keeps the different regions of the nation engaged at a higher level than having just 1 or 2 dominant conferences.

I think a P3 could be just as viable as a P4. But, we will just have to wait and see.

(05-31-2016 11:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-30-2016 08:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

I guess where I differ is I just don't see 4 power conferences as a goal for any of the powers-that-be. Leaving out a champion or two might suck when your team it out, but the flip side of that is that it creates enormous drama through the season which is great for ratings.

Beyond that, the conferences won't expand for any greater good, it has to be their own good and I just think there are too many Big 12 schools that no one would want. They also are unlikely to be excited about starting up all the difficult divisional discussions and such again (although that is a side issue).

When the conferences expand again it will be for leverage, and money. If expansion eliminates the doubt of getting your champion into the CFP revenue pot that will be a nice perk.

I don't think having 4 conferences all of the same size is a goal of the conferences, but having competitive balance is something the networks are interested in maintaining. A semblance of balance keeps the different regions of the nation engaged at a higher level than having just 1 or 2 dominant conferences.

I think a P3 could be just as viable as a P4. But, we will just have to wait and see.

I glaze over when the conversation turns in this direction.

The logic is undeniable and the facts indisputable but it still requires a trigger and we are in a situation waiting for a trigger.

(05-31-2016 08:08 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(05-31-2016 11:41 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-30-2016 08:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:53 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-29-2016 10:16 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  It's fun to think about, but I think a break-up at this point is highly unlikely (when/if it happens). They'll either expand by 2 or stay at 10 and that will be it for a few years.

Now if/when we get a break-up in the next decade, it will be one of two ways imo.
1. Basically a merger of major conferences.
2. Very unorganized raid.

I think they do get brokered. The lesser brands do realize that if they wait until the end of the GOR that their instate top brands will have lost any leverage they might have to use on their behalf. And, the top brands are looking at Big 10 and SEC money and realizing just how much they are missing out on if they wait another 8 years.

I do acknowledge the wisdom in your point of view as well. The networks would both be better off if everyone waited. Then maybe 4 or 5 schools tops would be taken from the Big 12. The rest would be relegated. Then in 2026 the same thing happens with the ACC. Only this time maybe as many as 8 brands are taken.

The problems with this line of thinking revolve around how much FOX desires to add to its stable of products and how much turf protecting ESPN wants to do.

But suffice it to say that if we wait there won't be 4 P conferences and there won't be 64 schools in the upper tier. The upper tier will be between 54 and 60 schools and the surviving conferences will be between 18 to 20 members in size.

If we broker now none of us will get everything we want out of the Big 12, but all of us will get something of value and somebody we can utilize but that doesn't fire our imaginations. But we will wind up with 4 conferences that are smaller and easier to manage and more inclusive.

I guess where I differ is I just don't see 4 power conferences as a goal for any of the powers-that-be. Leaving out a champion or two might suck when your team it out, but the flip side of that is that it creates enormous drama through the season which is great for ratings.

Beyond that, the conferences won't expand for any greater good, it has to be their own good and I just think there are too many Big 12 schools that no one would want. They also are unlikely to be excited about starting up all the difficult divisional discussions and such again (although that is a side issue).

When the conferences expand again it will be for leverage, and money. If expansion eliminates the doubt of getting your champion into the CFP revenue pot that will be a nice perk.

I don't think having 4 conferences all of the same size is a goal of the conferences, but having competitive balance is something the networks are interested in maintaining. A semblance of balance keeps the different regions of the nation engaged at a higher level than having just 1 or 2 dominant conferences.

I think a P3 could be just as viable as a P4. But, we will just have to wait and see.

I glaze over when the conversation turns in this direction.

The logic is undeniable and the facts indisputable but it still requires a trigger and we are in a situation waiting for a trigger.

The trigger will be external to the sport and the networks. An economic crisis would get it done in a hurry so I'm happy to wait. There is so much to realignment that has nothing to do with sports. In some ways it is the assembling of the programs that will survive the downsizing in education and external revenue streams will be used to get them through the obvious state cuts that are coming.

But it is all natural if left alone. We got all of these small schools in response to the GI Bill and soldiers and sailors returning from WWII, and grew it further with their children, the Boomers. That bulge is just about through the snake. An ebb in higher education is called for not only due to a more normal birth rate, but also due to the paradigm shift with technology. We need skilled people more than we need philosophers and professional educators. But most of all we need people with a desire to actually work.