Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Author Message
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #521
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
No. Bad David.
03-23-2019 03:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #522
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-23-2019 12:23 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(03-23-2019 09:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Lots of working pieces in the 1982 Nerdlinger plan. I'm not sure I see a fb only conference forming from the eligible Big West, MVC, and MAC schools. Also, what makes FSU and Penn St choose the Big East? Why would the absence of some of those lower level programs push them towards that conference?

Why FSU and PSU to the Big East? Butterflies! 03-wink

It's not implausible, if the Big East actually played its cards right and were proactive rather than reactive.

Why the butterflies though? Both stadiums were plenty big and they were not at risk of failing to meet attendance requirements.
03-23-2019 07:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
whittx Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,703
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation: 122
I Root For: FSU, Bport,Corn
Location:
Post: #523
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-23-2019 01:40 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(03-23-2019 07:08 AM)whittx Wrote:  With you for the most part, but even in this scenario Louisiana Tech and Buffalo move into FBS in the mid 90's, leaving the other LA schools behind in a FCS Sun Belt. Also, Liberty still gets their waiver to move up, since they would have pushed for it around the same time frame as an institutional decision.

Not necessarily, especially since butterflies stemming from the point of divergence could have resulted in different administrations of those universities.

Maybe with UB but not with the other two, especially with a place that the President is the founder's son like Liberty is. Also, are we working under the assumption that the NCAA would still require D1 schools to have all their sports in D1 at some point. If I remember correctly, UAB started out their football in D3.
(This post was last modified: 03-23-2019 07:28 PM by whittx.)
03-23-2019 07:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #524
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-23-2019 07:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(03-23-2019 12:23 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(03-23-2019 09:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Lots of working pieces in the 1982 Nerdlinger plan. I'm not sure I see a fb only conference forming from the eligible Big West, MVC, and MAC schools. Also, what makes FSU and Penn St choose the Big East? Why would the absence of some of those lower level programs push them towards that conference?

Why FSU and PSU to the Big East? Butterflies! 03-wink

It's not implausible, if the Big East actually played its cards right and were proactive rather than reactive.

Why the butterflies though? Both stadiums were plenty big and they were not at risk of failing to meet attendance requirements.

The idea behind the butterfly effect is that one small change in history can have exponentially drastic and unpredictable consequences. TBH, this timeline is already unrealistically convergent to our own. I threw in some plausible differences to spice it up.
03-23-2019 08:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #525
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Here's one to play out: GT and Tulane never leave the SEC and that conference has no room to expand in 1991.

What happens to Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida St, and all the other schools that made big moves that year? How do subsequent rounds of realignment play out?
03-23-2019 08:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #526
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-23-2019 08:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's one to play out: GT and Tulane never leave the SEC and that conference has no room to expand in 1991.

What happens to Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida St, and all the other schools that made big moves that year? How do subsequent rounds of realignment play out?

I wonder when they realize they can split into 2 divisions and have a CCG.
03-29-2019 02:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #527
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(03-29-2019 02:48 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(03-23-2019 08:30 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Here's one to play out: GT and Tulane never leave the SEC and that conference has no room to expand in 1991.

What happens to Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida St, and all the other schools that made big moves that year? How do subsequent rounds of realignment play out?

I wonder when they realize they can split into 2 divisions and have a CCG.

Probably not too long after evil genius Mike Slive digs out the NCAA rule book and finds it.

The fall out is likely Arkansas supplanting Baylor as a Big 12 member. Meanwhile South Carolina gets invited back into the ACC when FSU comes in, essentially getting GT's spot.

Hard to say how this ripples to the non-BCS conferences. The easiest solution is that Baylor takes Tulane's spot as a C-USA founder, alongside Houston and not much else changes. There's also an outside chance that they don't disband the SWC and the 5 left behind restock. In 1996 Tulsa, USM, and UTEP would have all said yes. Maybe they pursue better candidates like Memphis, Louisville, and Cincy.
03-29-2019 08:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #528
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(10-19-2018 09:03 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(03-21-2018 09:14 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Revisiting a successful Texoma gambit by the Pac in 2010. Here the ACC and Big 12 are gutted. The remnants band together with Notre Dame, TCU, and a few BE football schools to survive as a power conference. Baylor is left out in the cold.

ACC/Big 16
East: Boston College, Florida State, Miami-FL, Syracuse
North: Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
South: Clemson, Duke, Georgia Tech, Wake Forest
West: Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, TCU

Big Ten
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State
North: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue
South: Maryland, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia
West: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Pac-16
East: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

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

Re-revisiting this successful Texoma-to-Pac scenario. In reality, if the current Big 12 survives the expiration of its GoR intact and renews for a decade or so, this scenario could actually come to pass in the 2030s when the ACC GoR expires (assuming the market mantra still holds sway in conference expansion decisions).

In any case, for fun, I developed schedules for the P4 conferences. The ACC/Big 16 and SEC have 8-game schedules, with the 4-team pods rotating between two 8-team divisions in a 3-year cycle. Each year, a team plays its division plus 1 interdivision crossover. Each team has a protected crossover for the 2 years out of 3 in which they're not in the same division, as well as an alternate crossover for the 1 year they share a division with the protected crossover. It takes 3 years to play every team once and 6 years to play every team home and away. In that 6-year time span, a team plays their division mates and protected crossover 6 times, their alternate crossover 4 times, and all other teams twice. Here are the crossovers for each team:

Team: Protected Crossover, Alternate Crossover

ACC/Big 16

East
Boston College: Duke, Iowa State
Florida State: Clemson, Kansas State
Miami-FL: Notre Dame, Georgia Tech
Syracuse: Pittsburgh, Wake Forest

North
Louisville: Iowa State, Duke
West Virginia: Kansas State, Clemson
Notre Dame: Miami-FL, TCU
Pittsburgh: Syracuse, Kansas

South
Duke: Boston College, Louisville
Clemson: Florida State, West Virginia
Georgia Tech: TCU, Miami-FL
Wake Forest: Kansas, Syracuse

West
Iowa State: Louisville, Boston College
Kansas State: West Virginia, Florida State
TCU: Georgia Tech, Notre Dame
Kansas: Wake Forest, Pittsburgh

============

SEC

East
Florida: LSU, Tennessee
Georgia: Auburn, Texas A&M
NC State: Mississippi State, Missouri
South Carolina: Arkansas, Vanderbilt

North
Tennessee: Alabama, Florida
Virginia Tech: Texas A&M, Auburn
Kentucky: Missouri, Mississippi State
Vanderbilt: Ole Miss, South Carolina

South
Alabama: Tennessee, LSU
Auburn: Georgia, Virginia Tech
Mississippi State: NC State, Kentucky
Ole Miss: Vanderbilt, Arkansas

West
LSU: Florida, Alabama
Texas A&M: Virginia Tech, Georgia
Missouri: Kentucky, NC State
Arkansas: South Carolina, Ole Miss

The Big Ten and Pac-16 have 9-game conference schedules with no protected crossovers. Their pods also cycle between divisions, but the North and South never share a division, nor do the East and West. For two years, there are Northeast and Southwest Divisions, and for the next two years, there are Northwest and Southeast Divisions. For each team in the Big Ten, the 2 interdivision crossovers per year are only against teams in the "opposite" pod (i.e., North vs. South, East vs. West). This results in each Big Ten team playing all other teams at least twice in 4 years. The Pac-16 has a skewed schedule wherein the interdivision crossovers are against a team in each of the 2 pods that constitute the other division. Consequently, in an 8-year span, a team plays each of its pod mates 8 times, each team in the opposite pod twice, and each team in the other 2 pods an average of 5 times (either 4 or 6). This allows the North and South schools greater access to California (and incidentally Texas) than they would have had with the Big Ten's schedule structure.

Any thoughts? I can share the schedule grids if anyone's interested.

Made some tweaks to the alignments and crossovers. Schedule structures are still the same.

ACC/Big 16
East: Boston College, Miami-FL, Notre Dame, Wake Forest
North: Syracuse, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Louisville
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Duke
West: TCU, Kansas State, Iowa State, Kansas

Big Ten
East: Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State
North: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue
South: Maryland, North Carolina, Rutgers, Virginia
West: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

Pac-16
East: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

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

============

Team: Protected crossover (play annually), Alternate crossover (play 2 out of 3 years)

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

ACC/Big 16

East
Boston College: Syracuse, Clemson
Miami-FL: Florida State, West Virginia
Notre Dame: Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech
Wake Forest: Duke, Louisville

North
Syracuse: Boston College, TCU
West Virginia: Kansas State, Miami-FL
Pittsburgh: Notre Dame, Iowa State
Louisville: Kansas, Wake Forest

South
Clemson: TCU, Boston College
Florida State: Miami-FL, Kansas State
Georgia Tech: Iowa State, Notre Dame
Duke: Wake Forest, Kansas

West
TCU: Clemson, Syracuse
Kansas State: West Virginia, Florida State
Iowa State: Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh
Kansas: Louisville, Duke

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

SEC

East
Florida: LSU, Tennessee
Georgia: Auburn, Virginia Tech
NC State: Mississippi State, Kentucky
South Carolina: Arkansas, Vanderbilt

North
Tennessee: Alabama, Florida
Virginia Tech: Texas A&M, Georgia
Kentucky: Missouri, NC State
Vanderbilt: Ole Miss, South Carolina

South
Alabama: Tennessee, LSU
Auburn: Georgia, Texas A&M
Mississippi State: NC State, Missouri
Ole Miss: Vanderbilt, Arkansas

West
LSU: Florida, Alabama
Texas A&M: Virginia Tech, Auburn
Missouri: Kentucky, Mississippi State
Arkansas: South Carolina, Ole Miss
(This post was last modified: 07-25-2019 08:26 PM by Nerdlinger.)
04-12-2019 03:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #529
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Let's visit an old Nerdlinger idea: while they were all in the SoCon VT and WVU don't vote to sanction Clemson and Maryland. This action is rewarded by bringing them along when the ACC is founded, now with 10 members.

Let's say history stays just as it did until the end of the 80s. South Carolina still leaves and GT takes their spot several years later. The SEC, ACC, and Big Ten are all at 10 members and looking to grow. How do things play out?

Arkansas and South Carolina to the SEC
Florida St and Miami to the ACC
Penn St to the Big Ten

BC, Cuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Temple, Army, Navy, and ND are all still Indy for now.

Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, USM, and Tulane are still in the Metro for the moment.

What ensues?
04-12-2019 08:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #530
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-12-2019 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's visit an old Nerdlinger idea: while they were all in the SoCon VT and WVU don't vote to sanction Clemson and Maryland. This action is rewarded by bringing them along when the ACC is founded, now with 10 members.

Let's say history stays just as it did until the end of the 80s. South Carolina still leaves and GT takes their spot several years later. The SEC, ACC, and Big Ten are all at 10 members and looking to grow. How do things play out?

Arkansas and South Carolina to the SEC
Florida St and Miami to the ACC
Penn St to the Big Ten

BC, Cuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Temple, Army, Navy, and ND are all still Indy for now.

Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, USM, and Tulane are still in the Metro for the moment.

What ensues?

I don't remember this idea, but I like it. Usually my PODs don't go back earlier than the '70s. I'm guessing that after adding the Florida schools, the ACC zipper-aligns like they did in 2005 in our timeline, only with WVU in the Atlantic instead of BC. Perhaps most of the remaining major independent Northeast schools become football affiliates of the Metro?

Metro (mid-'90s)
East: Boston College*, East Carolina*, Pittsburgh*, Rutgers*, Syracuse*, Temple*
West: Cincinnati, Houston, Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, Tulane

* = football only
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2019 02:34 PM by Nerdlinger.)
04-13-2019 02:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #531
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
I'm going to tweak the ACC zipper divisions slightly--UVA and VT are a crossover rivalry, as are WVU/Maryland:

Atlantic: M'land, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami
Coastal: WVU, VT, NC St, WF, Clemson, FSU

The northeastern schools stay independents until at least 1996. Those 5 plus ND can probably sustain independent status and put schedules together.

It's harder to decide if the Metro break up still occurs. With VT in the ACC the Metro cohort would have one less member.

I struggle with putting BC, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Temple in a league as fb affiliates with a reunited C-USA/Metro. The first 3 definitely would consider their fb programs to be superior to the C-USA/Metro programs. Brushing shoulders with them would be a tough pill to swallow but if that's what they had to do for a tv deal and a shot at a BCS bowl I guess they take it.

UAB and USF probably get involved with a depleted Metro/C-USA and elevate their programs.

2005 becomes a much different year in realignment. If the Big East and A-10 schools become Metro/C-USA football affiliates probably very little happens. The WAC schools that moved that year stay put. UCF and Marshall stay put.
04-13-2019 09:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #532
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-13-2019 09:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm going to tweak the ACC zipper divisions slightly--UVA and VT are a crossover rivalry, as are WVU/Maryland:

Atlantic: M'land, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami
Coastal: WVU, VT, NC St, WF, Clemson, FSU

The northeastern schools stay independents until at least 1996. Those 5 plus ND can probably sustain independent status and put schedules together.

It's harder to decide if the Metro break up still occurs. With VT in the ACC the Metro cohort would have one less member.

I struggle with putting BC, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Temple in a league as fb affiliates with a reunited C-USA/Metro. The first 3 definitely would consider their fb programs to be superior to the C-USA/Metro programs. Brushing shoulders with them would be a tough pill to swallow but if that's what they had to do for a tv deal and a shot at a BCS bowl I guess they take it.

UAB and USF probably get involved with a depleted Metro/C-USA and elevate their programs.

2005 becomes a much different year in realignment. If the Big East and A-10 schools become Metro/C-USA football affiliates probably very little happens. The WAC schools that moved that year stay put. UCF and Marshall stay put.

In the zipper alignment I proposed for the ACC, WVU and VT are protected crossovers, and UMD plays WVU in-division.

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Maryland, NC State, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia Tech

Swapping UMD and VT makes the divisions less balanced competitively.
04-14-2019 08:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #533
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-14-2019 08:19 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(04-13-2019 09:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm going to tweak the ACC zipper divisions slightly--UVA and VT are a crossover rivalry, as are WVU/Maryland:

Atlantic: M'land, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami
Coastal: WVU, VT, NC St, WF, Clemson, FSU

The northeastern schools stay independents until at least 1996. Those 5 plus ND can probably sustain independent status and put schedules together.

It's harder to decide if the Metro break up still occurs. With VT in the ACC the Metro cohort would have one less member.

I struggle with putting BC, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Temple in a league as fb affiliates with a reunited C-USA/Metro. The first 3 definitely would consider their fb programs to be superior to the C-USA/Metro programs. Brushing shoulders with them would be a tough pill to swallow but if that's what they had to do for a tv deal and a shot at a BCS bowl I guess they take it.

UAB and USF probably get involved with a depleted Metro/C-USA and elevate their programs.

2005 becomes a much different year in realignment. If the Big East and A-10 schools become Metro/C-USA football affiliates probably very little happens. The WAC schools that moved that year stay put. UCF and Marshall stay put.

In the zipper alignment I proposed for the ACC, WVU and VT are protected crossovers, and UMD plays WVU in-division.

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Maryland, NC State, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia Tech

Swapping UMD and VT makes the divisions less balanced competitively.

The Terps would rather be with UVA, UNC, and Duke. Divisions aren't always about competitive balance. The main goal is preservation of key rivalries to make palatable schedules for all of the members.

Here are some thoughts about some schools in this alternative:

ND: Joins the Big East as its 10th member in the mid 1990s. Part of the deal is that they have to play Cuse, BC, and Pitt annually.

Army: If BC, Cuse, Pitt, Rutgers, and Temple opt to be fb only members in the Metro/C-USA in 1996 then Army is the 12th member.

UConn: Doesn't elevate to FBS. A lot of people point to Temple's expulsion as a product of performance and attendance but the real root of their expulsion is that the BE needed 8 full members to play in the fb conference to meet NCAA requirements. Villanova didn't want them as a full member and with UConn coming up they had their 8th member rendering Temple superfluous.

ECU: if BC, Cuse, Pitt, Rutgers and Temple align with the Metro/C-USA then ECU gets left as an independent and ultimately get in the Sunbelt mix. If they don't, ECU gets involved with Metro/C-USA.

Marshall and UCF: Both stay in the MAC. UCF might consider the Sunbelt in 2001.

UAB and USF: The Metro/C-USA need this pair regardless of whether the get the Northeastern schools as fb affiliates. They still elevate their programs because by 2005ish the NCAA requires FBS conferences to include 8 full members in their fb conference. This means a 14 team football conference in they also have 6 NE affiliates.

DePaul, St Louis, Marquette, and Charlotte: Metro/C-USA needs at least a couple of these schools in 1991. Maybe even all of them.

Tulsa, TCU, SMU, Rice, UTEP: these 5 all are in the WAC-16 in 1996 and in 1999 end up in an awkard situation in with the MWC founding. I'm going to say that the WAC goes to a 12 team model with 6 west coast members and 6 central time zone teams. Utah St joins Hawaii, SJSU, Fresno St, Nevada, and Boise St in the West. LA Tech becomes the 6th CTZ school.

NMSU and UNT: still end up in the Sunbelt, possibly sooner than 2001. Idaho tags along as a fb independent for as long as they are needed or until they go back to FCS.

Pitt, Cuse, BC: I think the ultimate deciding factor for independence vs affiliation is whether or not the Bowl Coalition/Alliance/BCS gives them the same ND clause for access and revenue.

Rutgers and Temple: I think the 3 Big East fb schools are the ones who determine where their fb goes. If those 3 are independent then these two A-10 schools keep their programs independent.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2019 08:19 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
04-14-2019 07:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #534
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-14-2019 07:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(04-14-2019 08:19 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(04-13-2019 09:00 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I'm going to tweak the ACC zipper divisions slightly--UVA and VT are a crossover rivalry, as are WVU/Maryland:

Atlantic: M'land, UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami
Coastal: WVU, VT, NC St, WF, Clemson, FSU

The northeastern schools stay independents until at least 1996. Those 5 plus ND can probably sustain independent status and put schedules together.

It's harder to decide if the Metro break up still occurs. With VT in the ACC the Metro cohort would have one less member.

I struggle with putting BC, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, and Temple in a league as fb affiliates with a reunited C-USA/Metro. The first 3 definitely would consider their fb programs to be superior to the C-USA/Metro programs. Brushing shoulders with them would be a tough pill to swallow but if that's what they had to do for a tv deal and a shot at a BCS bowl I guess they take it.

UAB and USF probably get involved with a depleted Metro/C-USA and elevate their programs.

2005 becomes a much different year in realignment. If the Big East and A-10 schools become Metro/C-USA football affiliates probably very little happens. The WAC schools that moved that year stay put. UCF and Marshall stay put.

In the zipper alignment I proposed for the ACC, WVU and VT are protected crossovers, and UMD plays WVU in-division.

ACC
Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Maryland, NC State, Wake Forest, West Virginia
Coastal: Georgia Tech, Miami-FL, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia Tech

Swapping UMD and VT makes the divisions less balanced competitively.

The Terps would rather be with UVA, UNC, and Duke. Divisions aren't always about competitive balance. The main goal is preservation of key rivalries to make palatable schedules for all of the members.

OK, but Maryland went to the Atlantic in our timeline, retaining a crossover with Virginia but losing the annual matchups with UNC and Duke. What about the presence of WVU instead of BC would make that different? If anything, I would think WVU also being in the Atlantic would make it more palatable for Maryland.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2019 09:34 PM by Nerdlinger.)
04-14-2019 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #535
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-12-2019 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's visit an old Nerdlinger idea: while they were all in the SoCon VT and WVU don't vote to sanction Clemson and Maryland. This action is rewarded by bringing them along when the ACC is founded, now with 10 members.

Let's say history stays just as it did until the end of the 80s. South Carolina still leaves and GT takes their spot several years later. The SEC, ACC, and Big Ten are all at 10 members and looking to grow. How do things play out?

Arkansas and South Carolina to the SEC
Florida St and Miami to the ACC
Penn St to the Big Ten

BC, Cuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Temple, Army, Navy, and ND are all still Indy for now.

Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, USM, and Tulane are still in the Metro for the moment.

What ensues?

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/30742308...from_1952/

This article indicates that the vote to put Clemson and UMD on probation for violating the SoCon's bowl ban went like so:

For (12): Davidson, Duke, George Washington, NC State, North Carolina, Richmond, Virginia Tech, VMI, Wake Forest, Washington & Lee, West Virginia, William & Mary

Against (5): Citadel, Clemson, Furman, Maryland, South Carolina

So if VT and WVU were excluded from the ACC for this vote, it would seem rather hypocritical of the NC-4 to go along with that.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2019 11:32 AM by Nerdlinger.)
04-20-2019 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #536
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Nice job digging up the article on the sanction vote.

The NC 4 were pretty critical for the formation of the ACC. You can't have an ACC without Tobacco Road. Those 4 apparently had a change of heart and buried the hatchet when they decided to found a conference with the SC schools and Maryland.

It's interesting that The Gamecocks and all the little SC schools voted in solidarity. While the little NC and VA schools voted yes. GW gave nearby Maryland no such love.

It would have been interesting if SC and Clemson would have used this as an impetus to try to join the SEC. It would have sent ripples in the college sports landscape for decades to come. If Maryland similarly wanted to sever ties they could have found themselves allied with the Eastern independents of the day.
04-20-2019 03:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #537
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Southern Conference was the very first conference that went Mega at one point.

Alabama 1921 to 1933
Auburn 1921 to 1933
Georgia 1921 to 1933
Georgia Tech 1921 to 1933
Kentucky 1921 to 1933
Miss. State 1921 to 1933
Tennessee 1921 to 1933
Virginia 1921 to 1937
Clemson 1921 to 1953
UNC 1921 to 1953
NCST 1921 to 1953
Maryland 1921 to 1953
Washington and Lee 1921 to 1958
Virginia Tech 1921 to 1965
Florida 1922 to 1933
LSU 1922 to 1933
Ole Miss. 1922 to 1933
Tulane 1922 to 1933
Vanderbilt 1922 to 1933
South Carolina 1922 to 1953
Sewanee 1923 to 1933
VMI 1924 to 2003 and 2014 to now
Duke 1928 to 1953

23 schools and too much ego. Minus 13 schools in 1933 leaves 10.
Wake Forest 1936 to 1953
George Washington 1936 to 1970
Richmond 1936 to 1976
Will. & Mary 1936 to 1977
The Citadel 1936 to now
Davidson 1936 to 1988
Furman 1936 to now

Brings the conference back up to 17. Virginia left in 1937 to indy.
West Virginia 1950 to 1968

7 schools left in 1953.
1 school left in 1958.

ECU 1964 to 1977

3 schools left between 1965 to 1970.

Appalachian State 1971 to 2014
Marshall 1976 to 1997
Chattanooga 1976 to now
Western Carolina 1976 to now

3 schools left.

East Tennessee State 1978 to 2005 and 2014 to now

1 school left in 1988.

Georgia Southern 1992 to 2014
UNC-Greensboro 1997 to now
Wofford 1997 to now
College of Charleston 1998 to 2013
Elon 2003 to 2014

2 schools left and rejoin later.

Samford 2008 to now
Mercer 2014 to now.

Southern still going after all the defections.
04-20-2019 04:12 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #538
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Playing on the idea that just Maryland, Clemson, and South Carolina leave the SoCon in 1953 it puts UNC, NC St, Duke, and WF in a conference with a group of small time schools like VMI, Citadel, William & Mary, and Furman. If they ever decided to to form a big school conference they'd have to take VT and WVU with them. Maybe they stay in a football deemphasized, academically oriented conference.

That leaves UVA and Maryland as potential players in Penn St's eastern all sports conference in the 1980s
04-20-2019 09:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
zoocrew Offline
Banned

Posts: 815
Joined: Mar 2019
I Root For: PITT, NAVY, MBB
Location:
Post: #539
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
The Big 12 takes BYU instead of West Virginia and the Big 10 doesn’t make their out of nowhere addition of Maryland/Rutgers thus leaving West Virginia/Louisville/Rutgers in the Big East. Nothing else changes.

The conference is this:

North

West Virginia
Louisville
UConn
Cincy
Temple
Rutgers

South

UCF
USF
Houston
Memphis
SMU
NAVY (football)

Plus the C7 for an 18 team BASKETBALL league and retains Big East name.

Is this conference still considered a G5, does it have a NY6 access bowl? and is being paid basically the same $ as now or is it closer to P5 level $.
(This post was last modified: 04-21-2019 03:34 PM by zoocrew.)
04-21-2019 03:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #540
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-21-2019 03:33 PM)zoocrew Wrote:  The Big 12 takes BYU instead of West Virginia and the Big 10 doesn’t make their out of nowhere addition of Maryland/Rutgers thus leaving West Virginia/Louisville/Rutgers in the Big East. Nothing else changes.

The conference is this:

North

West Virginia
Louisville
UConn
Cincy
Temple
Rutgers

South

UCF
USF
Houston
Memphis
SMU
NAVY (football)

Plus the C7 for an 18 team BASKETBALL league and retains Big East name.

Is this conference still considered a G5, does it have a NY6 access bowl? and is being paid basically the same $ as now or is it closer to P5 level $.

As a Big Ten fan this would be fantastic but it I'd feel bad for Louisville, WVU, and Rutgers...on second thought, not Rutgers...they are awful and deserve to be in a tweener league. And tweener league is exactly where I think they'd be. The tv money would be way better than the peanuts they got under the contract that just expired. I also think they find themselves lumped in the G5 but with a rock solid grip on the G5 berth, earning all 5 since its inception.

Let me tweak the division's a bit:

East: UConn, Temple, Rutgers, Navy, UCF, UCF

West: WVU, Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, SMU, Houston
04-22-2019 08:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.