Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Author Message
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #421
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(12-27-2018 11:21 AM)whittx Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 11:09 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  When the Big East expanded in 2005, were there any other schools that were considered for expansion (aside from Louisville, Cincinnati, USF, DePaul and Marquette)?

UCF was considered but then they saw the glorified high school gym that they played basketball in and went with the school that had a 10K arena on-campus (USF).

More D1 pedigree too with USF having already competed in high major basketball leagues like CUSA 1.0 and SBC 1.0 vs. ASun membership for UCF.
12-27-2018 11:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #422
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(12-27-2018 10:53 AM)whittx Wrote:  In this scenario, they would have gone with UCF first as a football only, since they were already an established DI program while USF was a startup. They only took USF for full membership because UCF didn't have the basketball facilities at the time and their other sports were in a worse conference.

Point taken, and changes made. Thanks!
12-27-2018 12:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,870
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 63
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #423
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.
12-27-2018 05:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,870
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 63
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #424
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10
01-10-2019 08:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
megadrone Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,114
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 36
I Root For: Rutgers
Location: NJ
Post: #425
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

At the press conference announcing the 2.0 configuration, Tranghese was asked about federated (football-only) memberships, and he said that the presidents weren't really interested in that setup. Temple was about to leave the conference and it really wasn't managed well on anybody's side.
01-10-2019 11:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,667
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 521
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #426
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 08:35 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10



Michigan blackballed ND from joining the Big Ten and refused to even play ND for decades.

So, I don't see how your imaginary scenario would have had a different outcome on that score.
01-10-2019 12:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #427
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 08:35 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10



Michigan blackballed ND from joining the Big Ten and refused to even play ND for decades.

So, I don't see how your imaginary scenario would have had a different outcome on that score.

Because ND would be joining the Big Ten before Michigan returns in this timeline.
01-10-2019 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #428
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(10-19-2018 08:28 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(10-14-2018 02:13 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  How about a P5 with 13-team conferences?

Pac 13 - add Texas Tech
Big 13 - Texas Tech to Pac 13; keep Missouri, Nebraska; add Pittsburgh, Louisville
ACC - Pittsburgh, Louisville to Big 13; Notre Dame becomes full member
SEC - Missouri to Big 13
Big 10 - Nebraska to Big 13

Then the G5 follows:

Mountain West - adds BYU
MAC - adds Marshall
Sun Belt - adds Charlotte, Old Dominion, Liberty
AAC - adds UMass (football only)
C-USA - Charlotte, Old Dominion, UAB to Sun Belt; adds New Mexico State

With 8 conference games, everyone has 4 fixed rivals, and plays 4 of the other 8 teams each year. The P5 then moves to 10 conference games.

Unlucky number 13! Works out for a nice 4+4/4 conference schedule, although having an odd number of teams requires byes or OOC games to fill in the gaps.

As long as we're doing unrealistic alignments, how about a 4x15 power conference scenario?

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Wake Forest
Coastal: Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech, Virginia, NC State
Eastern: Miami-FL, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Boston College

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Central: Purdue, Northwestern, Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois
West: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas

Pac-15
East: Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah
Pacific: UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, California
West: USC, Oregon State, Washington State, Arizona State, Stanford

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State
West: LSU, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arkansas, Ole Miss

Also, here's the rebuilt Big 12, now a non-power conference:

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas State, Memphis, Oklahoma State
South: Baylor, Central Florida, Houston, South Florida, TCU

P4 conference schedules are 8 games, with each team playing its division every year plus 1 protected crossover and 1 rotating crossover in each of the other 2 divisions. The teams are ordered within their divisions so that their protected crossovers are in the same "column" (e.g., Clemson's protected crossovers are Florida State and Miami, etc.). Conference championships are 2-round affairs, with the 3 division champs and a wild card duking it out.

I thought of a better alignment for the ACC-15:

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, NC State, Wake Forest
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke
Eastern: Notre Dame, Miami-FL, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse

The Atlantic and Coastal are actually the same as in reality, minus 2 schools each. Unlike my first proposal, this allows for annual Clemson/NCSU and Miami/VT matchups. The Atlantic Division is a bit OP though.
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2019 04:47 PM by Nerdlinger.)
01-10-2019 12:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,870
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 63
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #429
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 12:44 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 08:35 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10



Michigan blackballed ND from joining the Big Ten and refused to even play ND for decades.

So, I don't see how your imaginary scenario would have had a different outcome on that score.

Because ND would be joining the Big Ten before Michigan returns in this timeline.

My point exactly. Without Fielding Yost and Michigan blocking the Irish from membership they get a spot in the Big Ten and when Michigan realized that the new conference they hypothetically formed was untenable they'd have to return to a Big Ten that had ND as a member.

It creates a much different history. ND spends decades as core member of the Big Ten and maybe Pitt and Penn St do too. The Big Ten likely adopts a CCG in the early 90s. ND never tangos with the Big East or ACC.
01-10-2019 12:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,667
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 521
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #430
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 12:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 12:44 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(01-10-2019 08:35 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10



Michigan blackballed ND from joining the Big Ten and refused to even play ND for decades.

So, I don't see how your imaginary scenario would have had a different outcome on that score.

Because ND would be joining the Big Ten before Michigan returns in this timeline.

My point exactly. Without Fielding Yost and Michigan blocking the Irish from membership they get a spot in the Big Ten and when Michigan realized that the new conference they hypothetically formed was untenable they'd have to return to a Big Ten that had ND as a member.

It creates a much different history. ND spends decades as core member of the Big Ten and maybe Pitt and Penn St do too. The Big Ten likely adopts a CCG in the early 90s. ND never tangos with the Big East or ACC.

That would have been exceedingly awful for ND.

ND would have never barnstormed or caught the imagination of millions from the 1920's onward. It would never have attracted the fan base it has.

ND's history would have been more like Northwestern in your scenario. No thanks.
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2019 03:16 PM by TerryD.)
01-10-2019 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,870
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 63
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #431
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Terry--as usual, you thinking solely about Notre Dame and missing the point of the exercise. We're pulling a thread and trying to envision what happens to the rest of the sweater. We have to divest ourselves of our knowledge of what actually occurred. If it's circa 1907 and the biggest obstacle to being in a first class athletic conference is gone by way of Michigan leaving and starting their own league then Notre Dame would have jumped all over an invite. It was exactly what Notre Dame wanted at the time--acceptance by the secular but Protestant ran academic institutions of the Midwest. Notre Dame still spends the whole 20th Century a college football blueblood, they just do so from within the Big Ten and never establish the annual series with USC and Stanford but would surely see the Trojans in some epic Rose Bowls. Pitt and Mich St, two of the rivals the Irish found when they couldn't get games with Big Ten schools, likely end up in that confence mix as well. Heck Navy, probably still bails you out in the 40s, cementing that series as well.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2019 01:39 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
01-11-2019 09:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #432
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 12:50 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(10-19-2018 08:28 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(10-14-2018 02:13 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  How about a P5 with 13-team conferences?

Pac 13 - add Texas Tech
Big 13 - Texas Tech to Pac 13; keep Missouri, Nebraska; add Pittsburgh, Louisville
ACC - Pittsburgh, Louisville to Big 13; Notre Dame becomes full member
SEC - Missouri to Big 13
Big 10 - Nebraska to Big 13

Then the G5 follows:

Mountain West - adds BYU
MAC - adds Marshall
Sun Belt - adds Charlotte, Old Dominion, Liberty
AAC - adds UMass (football only)
C-USA - Charlotte, Old Dominion, UAB to Sun Belt; adds New Mexico State

With 8 conference games, everyone has 4 fixed rivals, and plays 4 of the other 8 teams each year. The P5 then moves to 10 conference games.

Unlucky number 13! Works out for a nice 4+4/4 conference schedule, although having an odd number of teams requires byes or OOC games to fill in the gaps.

As long as we're doing unrealistic alignments, how about a 4x15 power conference scenario?

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Wake Forest
Coastal: Florida State, North Carolina, Virginia Tech, Virginia, NC State
Eastern: Miami-FL, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Boston College

Big Ten
East: Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
Central: Purdue, Northwestern, Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois
West: Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas

Pac-15
East: Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah
Pacific: UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, California
West: USC, Oregon State, Washington State, Arizona State, Stanford

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia
Central: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State
West: LSU, Texas A&M, Missouri, Arkansas, Ole Miss

Also, here's the rebuilt Big 12, now a non-power conference:

Big 12
North: Cincinnati, Iowa State, Kansas State, Memphis, Oklahoma State
South: Baylor, Central Florida, Houston, South Florida, TCU

P4 conference schedules are 8 games, with each team playing its division every year plus 1 protected crossover and 1 rotating crossover in each of the other 2 divisions. The teams are ordered within their divisions so that their protected crossovers are in the same "column" (e.g., Clemson's protected crossovers are Florida State and Miami, etc.). Conference championships are 2-round affairs, with the 3 division champs and a wild card duking it out.

I thought of a better alignment for the ACC-15:

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Louisville, NC State, Wake Forest
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke
Eastern: Notre Dame, Miami-FL, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse

The Atlantic and Coastal are actually the same as in reality, minus 2 schools each. Unlike my first proposal, this allows for annual Clemson/NCSU and Miami/VT matchups. The Atlantic Division is a bit OP though.

Here's a third possible alignment for the ACC-15 that keeps all the NC schools together. It also allows for an annual FSU/GT series. On the other hand, this setup prevents annual Miami/VT and Duke/UVA matchups. Also, this time the Coastal is a bit OP, but overall it's not that bad an alignment.

ACC
Atlantic: Duke, Louisville, NC State, North Carolina, Wake Forest
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech, Clemson, Virginia, Florida State
Eastern: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse, Miami-FL
01-24-2019 08:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #433
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
In this timeline, Penn State founded an all-sports (including football) Eastern Athletic Conference in the mid-'70s along with BC, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, Temple, and WV. The league would eventually add VT, FSU, Miami, and ND before gobbling up most of the ACC in the 2010s. Thus we arrive at a semi-realistic "dream"(?) east coast mega-conference:

Eastern Athletic Conference
East: Boston College, Maryland, Miami-FL, Notre Dame, Virginia, Virginia Tech
North: Syracuse, Temple, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, West Virginia
South: NC State, Duke, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Clemson

Protected crossovers:

East/North/South
Boston College/Syracuse/NC State
Maryland/Temple/Duke
Miami-FL/Penn State/Florida State
Notre Dame/Pittsburgh/Georgia Tech
Virginia/Rutgers/North Carolina
Virginia Tech/West Virginia/Clemson

Football schedule is 9 games: 5 division mates + 1 protected crossover and 1 rotating crossover in each of the other 2 divisions.

Basketball schedule is 20 games. Each team plays 3 protected opponents twice (home and away) and the other 14 opponents once. Here are the protected opponents:

Code:
BOSTON COLLEGE  Syracuse        Notre Dame      Miami-FL        
CLEMSON         NC State        Georgia Tech    Florida State  
DUKE            North Carolina  NC State        Georgia Tech    
FLORIDA STATE   Georgia Tech    Miami-FL        Clemson        
GEORGIA TECH    Florida State   Clemson         Duke            
MARYLAND        Rutgers         Virginia Tech   Virginia        
MIAMI-FL        Notre Dame      Florida State   Boston College  
NC STATE        Clemson         Duke            North Carolina  
NORTH CAROLINA  Duke            Virginia        NC State        
NOTRE DAME      Miami-FL        Boston College  Pittsburgh      
PENN STATE      Temple          Pittsburgh      Syracuse        
PITTSBURGH      West Virginia   Penn State      Notre Dame      
RUTGERS         Maryland        Syracuse        Temple          
SYRACUSE        Boston College  Rutgers         Penn State      
TEMPLE          Penn State      West Virginia   Rutgers        
VIRGINIA        Virginia Tech   North Carolina  Maryland        
VIRGINIA TECH   Virginia        Maryland        West Virginia  
WEST VIRGINIA   Pittsburgh      Temple          Virginia Tech
(This post was last modified: 02-16-2019 08:15 AM by Nerdlinger.)
02-06-2019 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,159
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 207
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #434
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

NCAA rules required, and still require, that an FBS conference have eight members that play both football and basketball in the conference in order to qualify for whatever benefits come with that status. It was the implementation of that requirement around 2000 that prompted the Big East to invite UConn as a football member in place of football only Temple.

USF was added after BC joined the ACC as its twelfth member in the fall of 2003. The Big East football members clearly wanted a school in Florida for recruiting purposes.

USF needed to be a full member. However, there was no reason the Big East couldn't have invited a 9th member of the football league that was football only. My guess is that they didn't want to "feed another mouth" with TV and BCS money that may have been fixed.

With respect to Depaul and Marquette, the basketball schools wanted two more non-football members to ensure continuity if and when the conference split. Taking them was a quid pro quo for their willingness to expand again for football. The "prenup" agreement reached at that time between the football and basketball schools was invoked when the C7 split in 2013.
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2019 02:57 PM by orangefan.)
02-06-2019 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,870
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 63
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #435
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(02-06-2019 02:53 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

NCAA rules required, and still require, that an FBS conference have eight members that play both football and basketball in the conference in order to qualify for whatever benefits come with that status. It was the implementation of that requirement around 2000 that prompted the Big East to invite UConn as a football member in place of football only Temple.

USF was added after BC joined the ACC as its twelfth member in the fall of 2003. The Big East football members clearly wanted a school in Florida for recruiting purposes.

USF needed to be a full member. However, there was no reason the Big East couldn't have invited a 9th member of the football league that was football only. My guess is that they didn't want to "feed another mouth" with TV and BCS money that may have been fixed.

With respect to Depaul and Marquette, the basketball schools wanted two more non-football members to ensure continuity if and when the conference split. Taking them was a quid pro quo for their willingness to expand again for football. The "prenup" agreement reached at that time between the football and basketball schools was invoked when the C7 split in 2013.

I'm not sure that 8 full members playing football was a rule yet but maybe your 2000 date is right. Big East football was founded with just 4 full members playing football and at the time of the raid there were only 7, with an 8th making their transition.
02-06-2019 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 1,519
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 56
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #436
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(02-06-2019 05:37 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(02-06-2019 02:53 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

NCAA rules required, and still require, that an FBS conference have eight members that play both football and basketball in the conference in order to qualify for whatever benefits come with that status. It was the implementation of that requirement around 2000 that prompted the Big East to invite UConn as a football member in place of football only Temple.

USF was added after BC joined the ACC as its twelfth member in the fall of 2003. The Big East football members clearly wanted a school in Florida for recruiting purposes.

USF needed to be a full member. However, there was no reason the Big East couldn't have invited a 9th member of the football league that was football only. My guess is that they didn't want to "feed another mouth" with TV and BCS money that may have been fixed.

With respect to Depaul and Marquette, the basketball schools wanted two more non-football members to ensure continuity if and when the conference split. Taking them was a quid pro quo for their willingness to expand again for football. The "prenup" agreement reached at that time between the football and basketball schools was invoked when the C7 split in 2013.

I'm not sure that 8 full members playing football was a rule yet but maybe your 2000 date is right. Big East football was founded with just 4 full members playing football and at the time of the raid there were only 7, with an 8th making their transition.

It was adopted in 2002 and went into effect for 2005.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productd...s/D119.pdf (p. 360)

20.02.6
Football Bowl subdivision Conference.
A conference classified as a Football Bowl Subdivision conference shall be comprised of at least eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members that satisfy all bowl subdivision requirements. An institution shall be included as one of the eight full Football Bowl Subdivision members only if the institution participates in the conference schedule in at least six men’s and eight women’s conference-sponsored sports, including men’s basketball and football and three women’s team sports including women’s basketball. A conference-sponsored sport shall be a sport in which regular-season and/or championship opportunities are provided, consistent with the minimum standards identified by the applicable NCAA sport committee for automatic qualification.
(Adopted: 10/31/02 effective 8/1/05, Revised: 12/15/06)
02-06-2019 06:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 4,840
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 145
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #437
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(02-06-2019 02:53 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

NCAA rules required, and still require, that an FBS conference have eight members that play both football and basketball in the conference in order to qualify for whatever benefits come with that status. It was the implementation of that requirement around 2000 that prompted the Big East to invite UConn as a football member in place of football only Temple.

USF was added after BC joined the ACC as its twelfth member in the fall of 2003. The Big East football members clearly wanted a school in Florida for recruiting purposes.

USF needed to be a full member. However, there was no reason the Big East couldn't have invited a 9th member of the football league that was football only. My guess is that they didn't want to "feed another mouth" with TV and BCS money that may have been fixed.

With respect to Depaul and Marquette, the basketball schools wanted two more non-football members to ensure continuity if and when the conference split. Taking them was a quid pro quo for their willingness to expand again for football. The "prenup" agreement reached at that time between the football and basketball schools was invoked when the C7 split in 2013.

UConn started the process of studying 1-A as early as 1990 when the Big East football conference was set in motion. They had an open invite from the get-go.

Interestingly enough, UMass had an offer from Robert Kraft to use the Pats stadium to move-up to 1-A back in the fall of 1994! Imagine if UMass upgraded back then when they started seriously studying the move.
02-06-2019 07:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,775
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 145
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #438
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(01-10-2019 08:35 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's another alternative scenario for you all to ponder: Michigan makes a terrible mistake

As some of you might know, at the beginning of the 20th century Michigan had a decade long hiatus from Big Ten play after a disagreement over conference rules and played as an independent. But what if they would have tried to form "the Western Ivy League":

Michigan
Carnegie-Melon
Case
Western Reserve
Miami
Chicago
Northwestern
Washington U. (St L)

The Big Ten would be down to just 6: Minn, Wisc, Iowa, Ill, Purdue, Ind

They could rebuild one of two ways:

Option A: Ohio St, Mich St, ND, Pitt

Option B: Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska

Either way, I'm sure that by the 40s, if not sooner, Michigan realizes that their academic powerhouse league can't cut it in sports and comes back, but without Northwestern and Chicago.

Option B would have the interesting consequence that the Oklahoma schools likely find permanent homes in the SWC, stabilizing that conference; Kansas St is left out; Colorado sticks with Mountain schools until at least the 2nd half of the century

Option A would create a real juggernaut, especially if Penn St accompanied Mich as the 12th member. Recall that Mich was a major obstacle for ND joining the B10


Chicago dropped sports in the 1940s.
02-07-2019 04:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
orangefan Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,159
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 207
I Root For: Syracuse
Location: New England
Post: #439
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(02-06-2019 07:44 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(02-06-2019 02:53 PM)orangefan Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 05:53 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I found it a little curious that the Big East took on USF as a full member in 2005. They could have doubled down in Florida and taken both USF and UCF as football affiliates but I suppose the realignment was designed to create 2 groups of 8 that could fulfill the NCAA requirements for an autobid after 5 years.

Providence
St John's
Seton Hall
Villanova
Georgetown
Notre Dame

UConn
Pitt
Syracuse
Rutgers
WVU
Cincinnati
Louisville

UCF (FB only)
USF (FB only)

13 for Olympics, 9 for football (and an 8 game conference schedule instead of that awkward 7).

If they ever decided to upgrade the U_Fs to full membership DePaul and Marquette are still there on the basketball side.

NCAA rules required, and still require, that an FBS conference have eight members that play both football and basketball in the conference in order to qualify for whatever benefits come with that status. It was the implementation of that requirement around 2000 that prompted the Big East to invite UConn as a football member in place of football only Temple.

USF was added after BC joined the ACC as its twelfth member in the fall of 2003. The Big East football members clearly wanted a school in Florida for recruiting purposes.

USF needed to be a full member. However, there was no reason the Big East couldn't have invited a 9th member of the football league that was football only. My guess is that they didn't want to "feed another mouth" with TV and BCS money that may have been fixed.

With respect to Depaul and Marquette, the basketball schools wanted two more non-football members to ensure continuity if and when the conference split. Taking them was a quid pro quo for their willingness to expand again for football. The "prenup" agreement reached at that time between the football and basketball schools was invoked when the C7 split in 2013.

UConn started the process of studying 1-A as early as 1990 when the Big East football conference was set in motion. They had an open invite from the get-go.

Interestingly enough, UMass had an offer from Robert Kraft to use the Pats stadium to move-up to 1-A back in the fall of 1994! Imagine if UMass upgraded back then when they started seriously studying the move.

I believe that the invite was part of the compromise related to the 1995 expansion that added Rutgers and West Virginia.
02-07-2019 08:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 4,840
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 145
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #440
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(12-27-2018 11:09 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  When the Big East expanded in 2005, were there any other schools that were considered for expansion (aside from Louisville, Cincinnati, USF, DePaul and Marquette)?

When Miami and Virginia Tech left, the Big East invited Louisville, Cincinnati, DePaul and Marquette.

When BC announced their departure, the Big East first considered USF and/or UCF for football-only membership. They decided on USF for full membership. Temple for full membership was the only other program seriously considered.
02-07-2019 08:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.