Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

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

Posts: 2,673
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 139
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #721
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-05-2020 08:54 PM)megadrone Wrote:  
(04-05-2020 05:37 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  What if the Big 10 had decided not to add Maryland and Rutgers in Nov 2012, preferring to stay at 12 (and perhaps giving them greater flexibility in who they offered in a future deal.

Maryland stays in the ACC.

Big East FB becomes:

UConn, Rutgers, Temple, Navy, UCF, USF
Cincy, L’ville, Memphis, SMU, Houston

Faced with the ultimatum that the Catholic 7 would dart if anymore full members members were added the football schools have to choose between an elevated Villanova program or UMass as a football only.


Tulane, Tulsa, and ECU stay in C-USA

FAU, WKU, and MTSU stay in the SBC

Coastal Carolina stays in FCS.

I think ECU was in as a football only by the time the Big 10 offered Rutgers. Navy probably still goes into the West division, with ECU in the East.

In terms of when the announcements came, Rutgers to the Big Ten was 11/20/2012, and ECU (FB only) and Tulane (full) to the Big East was 11/27/2012. In any case, even before Rutgers left, it was too late to prevent the basketball schools from splitting off. That line had been crossed at the very latest by the time Pitt and Syracuse announced they were joining the ACC, but probably earlier (the Miami/VT departures).
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2020 09:04 PM by Nerdlinger.)
04-05-2020 09:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #722
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
The Rutgers and Louisville departures were announced in November (as was Tulane and ECU).

December was when the Catholic 7 left.

I’m working under the presumption that the loss of that pair and the announcements of their replacements were the straws that broke the camel’s back.

If the Catholic 7 decide to leave anyway then it would be up to the other 10 to pick an 11th full member or find a football only to balance Navy.
04-05-2020 09:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 2,673
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 139
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: :uoᴉʇɐɔo⌉
Post: #723
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-05-2020 09:21 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Rutgers and Louisville departures were announced in November (as was Tulane and ECU).

December was when the Catholic 7 left.

I’m working under the presumption that the loss of that pair and the announcements of their replacements were the straws that broke the camel’s back.

If the Catholic 7 decide to leave anyway then it would be up to the other 10 to pick an 11th full member or find a football only to balance Navy.

Faulty assumption. For one, ECU was FB only at the time, and for two, Tulane had to have been approved by several of the C7. Not to mention that associating with a school like Tulane is a university president's dream. No, the C7's decision to leave would have to have been made much earlier.
04-05-2020 10:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 6,677
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 241
I Root For: The Heels
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #724
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-05-2020 10:01 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(04-05-2020 09:21 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Rutgers and Louisville departures were announced in November (as was Tulane and ECU).

December was when the Catholic 7 left.

I’m working under the presumption that the loss of that pair and the announcements of their replacements were the straws that broke the camel’s back.

If the Catholic 7 decide to leave anyway then it would be up to the other 10 to pick an 11th full member or find a football only to balance Navy.

Faulty assumption. For one, ECU was FB only at the time, and for two, Tulane had to have been approved by several of the C7. Not to mention that associating with a school like Tulane is a university president's dream. No, the C7's decision to leave would have to have been made much earlier.

The 7 probably knew they were on their way out and approved Tulane as a favor to a pal. But seriously, what did it matter who they voted in at that point? It’s the great totem pole of realignment. Nothing’s changed. Tulane got in C-USA before ECU and Tulsa as well. Most people over analyze this stuff when the answers are already there.
04-05-2020 10:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #725
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-05-2020 10:01 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(04-05-2020 09:21 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Rutgers and Louisville departures were announced in November (as was Tulane and ECU).

December was when the Catholic 7 left.

I’m working under the presumption that the loss of that pair and the announcements of their replacements were the straws that broke the camel’s back.

If the Catholic 7 decide to leave anyway then it would be up to the other 10 to pick an 11th full member or find a football only to balance Navy.

Faulty assumption. For one, ECU was FB only at the time, and for two, Tulane had to have been approved by several of the C7. Not to mention that associating with a school like Tulane is a university president's dream. No, the C7's decision to leave would have to have been made much earlier.

ECU’s fb membership and Tulane’s full membership were announced a month before the Catholic 7 chose to leave.

Tulane’s poor basketball program was at the time reported to be a breaking point for the Catholic 7. Maybe the Catholic 7 already had their minds made up and the loss of Pitt, Cuse, and WVU was enough to make them bid adieu to the football side.

Regardless, C-USA and the SBC look a whole lot different if the Big Ten holds at 12.
04-06-2020 11:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,424
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 261
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #726
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
(04-06-2020 11:42 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(04-05-2020 10:01 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  
(04-05-2020 09:21 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Rutgers and Louisville departures were announced in November (as was Tulane and ECU).

December was when the Catholic 7 left.

I’m working under the presumption that the loss of that pair and the announcements of their replacements were the straws that broke the camel’s back.

If the Catholic 7 decide to leave anyway then it would be up to the other 10 to pick an 11th full member or find a football only to balance Navy.

Faulty assumption. For one, ECU was FB only at the time, and for two, Tulane had to have been approved by several of the C7. Not to mention that associating with a school like Tulane is a university president's dream. No, the C7's decision to leave would have to have been made much earlier.

ECU’s fb membership and Tulane’s full membership were announced a month before the Catholic 7 chose to leave.

Tulane’s poor basketball program was at the time reported to be a breaking point for the Catholic 7. Maybe the Catholic 7 already had their minds made up and the loss of Pitt, Cuse, and WVU was enough to make them bid adieu to the football side.

Regardless, C-USA and the SBC look a whole lot different if the Big Ten holds at 12.

The C7 approved Tulane (basketball included) due to the academic association AND the promise made by the (then) conference leadership that acquiring major markets was going to salvage/create a high-paying hybrid conference (just the like the Big East had been up to that point). The C7 also approved Houston, SMU, UCF and Memphis as full-members, but Boise State, San Diego State and ECU were simply football-only members. The pitch was that getting these top markets for an all-sports league (Houston, Dallas, Orlando, New Orleans, Memphis, along with Tampa, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Washington D.C., Chicago, Milwaukee, New York City, etc.) would create high value/high volume content for ESPN, and would recoup much of the lost value when Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, etc. all left (despite the clear drop-off in athletic branding and associations).

When it was learned that, in fact, ESPN/networks were actually NOT willing to pay that high value that was being pushed behind closed doors (and a major reason why the C7 approved Tulane in the first place, despite the very poor basketball program), that's when the C7 seriously began to consider breaking-off and creating a non-football league. At that point, the hybrid model simply did not provide the value necessary to keep a collection of dissimilar athletic programs/schools together. FWIW, at the time, the C7 was very aware that - despite they were just a football-only invitation/acceptance - that ECU inevitably was going to join the BE as a full member. It was only a matter of time.

Had the financial promises from leadership about the contract details been kept, the hybrid model could have continued; however, inevitably, the factions provided more value separated rather than together.
04-06-2020 12:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #727
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Remember the WAC-16 from 1996-1998? From what I’ve read, it came into being by one vote. But what if they couldn’t get the votes and don’t add 2 members to their eastern flank and 4 to the west? (From what I understand, the 3 SWC schools were only coming as a package deal and the West schools were going to block any expansion that didn’t include UNLV and SJSU).

The WAC holds at 10:

Hawaii, Fresno St, San Diego St, Utah, BYU, Wyo, Colo St, AFA, UNM, UTEP

The Big West still expands that year:

SJSU, UNLV, Nevada, Utah St, NMSU, Boise St, Idaho, UNT

What happens with the SWC schools? I’d think Houston still bails on the other 3.

Any chance that C-USA decides to go to 16 in all sports and 10 for football?:

Tulsa, SMU, TCU, Houston, Rice, Tulane, USM, Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati
non-fb: UAB, Char, USF, DePaul, Marquette, St Louis

by 2003 fb would be at 12 with the UAB and USF upgrades

The alternative for the SWC schools is a lot bleaker.

2005 sees Louisville, Cincinnati, USF, DePaul, Marquette, St Louis, and Charlotte depart C-USA and Marshall, UCF, and ECU join.

SBC football doesn’t get off the ground until 2005 with Ark St, LA Tech, ULL, MTSU, Troy, FAU, and FIU.

The WAC and Big Sky conferences enjoy stability from 1996-2010, when Utah and BYU leave the WAC.
04-28-2020 08:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #728
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
We’ve talked about the founding of the ACC in this thread before but I wanted to revisit it with this thought.

We’ve talked about how history would be different had VT and WVU been included in addition to the 8 founders but what if they had been included and private schools Duke and WF get left out, a public schools only line up?

UNC and NC St benefitted by having two extra votes on conference matters but I imagine it would have been more beneficial had they left them behind to whither into what programs like Furman, VMI, Citadel, Richmond, and William & Mary became. With less instate competition the Wolf Pack and Tar Heel programs end up a lot stronger.

South Carolina never gets mad and goes Indy and doesn’t get lured to the SEC in 1991. GT and Florida St still join, bringing membership up to 10. Miami and BC make 12.

North: BC, WVU, Maryland, VT, UVA, UNC
South: NC St, Clemson, SC, GT, FSU, Miami

Not a bad set up. Maybe they manage to hold on to WVU and Maryland too. WVU probably stays (Louisville joins the Big 12 in their spot). Maryland probably doesn’t. Assuming they still invite Pitt and Syracuse when they do, Maryland’s replacement probably ends up being UConn:

North: BC, UConn, Cuse, Pitt, WVU, VT, Miami
South: UVA, UNC, NC St, Clemson, SC, GT, FSU

VA and FL schools get protected crossovers
05-15-2020 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 48,204
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1518
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #729
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
The more time that passes the happier I am Maryland left. Maryland for Louisville seems to be a straight up across the board upgrade.
05-15-2020 02:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,963
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #730
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Would Oklahoma St have been better off had they not joined the MVC in 1925?

3 years later, the other 6 public schools bolted, angered because Oklahoma St won the football title in 1927 despite playing fewer conference games than everyone else, to form the Big 6.

Rather than spending decades in a weakened revolving door conference they could have spent that time in the SWC.
06-23-2020 05:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CarlSmithCenter Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 207
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 17
I Root For: Ball So Hard U
Location:
Post: #731
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Tulane and Georgia Tech never leave the SEC. In 1991 the SEC adds Arkansas and South Carolina.

SEC East: UT, UK, SCAR, UGA, GT, UF, Vandy
SEC West: Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Tulane, Arkansas

In 2011 A&M and Mizzou join.

SEC West: Arkansas, A&M, Mizzou, Vandy
SEC Gulf: LSU, Tulane Ole Miss, MSU
SEC Central: Bama, Auburn, UK, UT
SEC East: SCAR, UGA, GT, UF
06-24-2020 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 707
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 22
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #732
RE: Alternate History and Future College Sports Realignment Scenarios
Honoring John Swofford's upcoming retirement, let's do a totally unrealistic one.

The ACC has the unusual makeup of 14 football members and 15 in men's and women's basketball. Assuming you have to have two divisions, you practically have to have an even number of teams in the conference. Now you can have an odd number of basketball teams but it isn't that great either. In a given weekend, one team is either off or has to play a non conference game. Ideally the ACC would have an even number of football members and basketball members. Assuming Notre Dame is going to stay a non football member, the only way for the ACC to have an even number of members in both conferences is to add a team in all sports but football.

If the ACC wanted to add a team for men's basketball and totally hurt the Big East ... again, the obvious choice would be Villanova. They'd also add the Philadelphia area to the ACC. They could also add UConn for all sports but football and use it as a carrot for them to improve football, possibly agreeing to 5 (or 3 or some other # of) games vs. ACC opponents a year. Either of them would hurt the Big East, Villanova would make them not a "power" conference in men's basketball. How about adding Villanova, UConn, and Georgetown to get the ACC back into the DC area after Maryland left? Then all those teams would be playing Syracuse again.

If Villanova goes to the ACC and UConn stays, what's the Big East's move? Do they stand pat or do they add another team? Maybe with Villanova out Temple could get into the Big East and do the same as UConn? What other dominos occur?
06-29-2020 09:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2020 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, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.