If you truly wanted to be more regional:
The ACC could swap Pitt to the B1G for Maryland, and could trade Louisville to the SEC for South Carolina.
Notre Dame could split their football with the ACC and B1G (I figure three games per year, each) and their other sports (I would imagine that most would stay with the ACC, but a few could migrate over to the B1G, just as Hockey did)

(09-01-2017 09:23 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(09-01-2017 08:54 AM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(09-01-2017 01:54 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I think it's safe to assume we either get an expansion of the CFP or such large conferences that creating semis for the leagues makes sense.

I would argue that the networks getting as many as 8 extra games from conference semis could be very profitable and perhaps more profitable than another round of the CFP as that would only be 4 games. The addition of conference semis would also guarantee that each region of the country was represented in the CFP as the winners of the conferences would either get an auto bid or a de facto bid.

You'd really need 4 fairly distinct regions to pull it off though which somewhat precludes the idea of the B1G taking Colorado and then making inroads to the West Coast. The Big 12 has to be carved up basically, but there's really not anymore room for major shifts unless we pare down to 3 leagues.

I agree with Lance's earlier statement that the networks don't want the conference getting more powerful because they recognize it will end up costing them. The question is...can the networks stop it from happening?

If the leagues go rogue and stop listening to the puppet masters then things could get really interesting. Slive did say after all that the next move would see very, very large conferences. I agree with JR's analysis that the reason the media never really picked up on that is because it doesn't line up with the preferred narrative. It will cost the networks a lot of money so why allow the idea to bear fruit in the mind of the public...

Earlier I proposed both the B1G and SEC slicing up sections of the PAC just to make things a little more interesting although I would be surprised if it actually happened that way.

I also keep going back to Osborne's specific mention of Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State. It was one of the more odd things I've seen so far as he took the time to mention schools that one would assume the B1G wouldn't be that interested in. He conspicuously left out major powers like Oklahoma and Texas and I don't think that was coincidental. If you're going to go to the trouble of naming names then it seems you wouldn't be afraid to name who you really thought had a chance.

I do tend to think the SEC will end up with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. Beyond that, I'm not very confident of much although I find Osborne's comments interesting for another reason as well...it would seem to point possibly to the Big Ten's strategy going forward. Perhaps we have to rethink what we think we know...

If the B1G is chasing 3 Big 12 schools then it makes sense they will add at least 4 in total. And if they're looking at a school like Kansas State then perhaps the academic requirement is not exactly what we thought it was. Perhaps it's purely about acquiring content and power through numbers...

What if it's something like this?

B1G adds Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

East: Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern
Central: Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa, Iowa State
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

The new regions are distinct, compact, and balanced. The schools in the Northwest are ecstatic to get to play more regular games in CA as all the teams are in the same division now. The B1G can absorb the PACN and should make a decent profit by concentrating on most of the major markets with fewer mouths to feed.

Perhaps the SEC goes with this...

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

I know that's all very similar to what I suggested earlier, but there are a few tweaks.

I could really see the AZ schools desiring to align with Texas and schools like Utah and BYU would be low hanging fruit that would allow a more regional lineup to work.

Also in this alignment, I create a scenario where UT and OU can play annually while A&M is not forced to play UT every year if they don't want to. If we're going to offend them then we might as well soften the blow. Adding USF and WVU to the East gives us a little extra exposure in that region as well.

Most importantly, ESPN retains total control of TX without any fear of interference from the PAC.

That's interesting. With the SEC & B1G going to 24 how would the ACC expand? In a P3 would ND be forced to join? I could see the ACC going to 18 with TCU, Houston, Cincinnati & either ND or UCONN, if they expanded at all. Would the ACC find security since there wouldn't be anymore room for the SEC & B1G to expand? How would the CFP be setup in a P3?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

B1G (from above)
East: Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern
Central: Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa, Iowa State
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

SEC (from above)
East: Florida, South Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Central: Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State

ACC
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Miami, Florida St, Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Clemson, East Carolina
West: Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Houston, TCU, Baylor
North: Boston College, Connecticut, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Temple

The ACC wouldn't go to 24 with that group or in this scenario. 15, 16 or 18 I believe would be the max.

ACC 18
North: ND/UCONN, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, BC
South: TCU, Houston, Miami, VT, NC State, WF
East: FSU, Clemson, NC, Duke, GT, Virginia

ACC 16
West: Houston, TCU, Louisville, Miami
North: Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC, VT
East: NC, Duke, Virginia, WF
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC State


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(09-01-2017 12:19 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  

(09-01-2017 09:23 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  B1G (from above)
East: Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern
Central: Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa, Iowa State
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

SEC (from above)
East: Florida, South Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Kentucky, West Virginia
South: Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Central: Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri
West: Texas, Texas Tech, Utah, BYU, Arizona, Arizona State

ACC
East: Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina St, Duke, Wake Forest
South: Miami, Florida St, Central Florida, Georgia Tech, Clemson, East Carolina
West: Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Houston, TCU, Baylor
North: Boston College, Connecticut, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Temple

The ACC wouldn't go to 24 with that group or in this scenario. 15, 16 or 18 I believe would be the max.

ACC 18
North: ND/UCONN, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Louisville, Cincinnati, BC
South: TCU, Houston, Miami, VT, NC State, WF
East: FSU, Clemson, NC, Duke, GT, Virginia

ACC 16
West: Houston, TCU, Louisville, Miami
North: Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC, VT
East: NC, Duke, Virginia, WF
South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC State


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. I just did 24 since the others were 24.

(09-01-2017 09:30 AM)XLance Wrote:  The number of "P" teams will shrink, not get larger. As content and marketability become more important, the elimination of a small school in a duplicate market (Wake Forest) or a little brother in a small market (Kansas State) is more likely than expansion.
I think it's likely that we could lose a couple of schools from the PAC (Washington State and Oregon State) and at least three from the Big 12 (Kansas State, TCU and Baylor) from the Big 12 in this go round. Eliminate Iowa State and let West Virginia seek another home, merge the PAC and Big 12 and add BYU as a football only partial for the PAC and you have a pretty good 16 team league.

B1G and SEC can stay at 14 (they both have plenty of content), West Virginia to the ACC for 16 with Notre Dame.
60 schools means 5 less mouths for FOX/ESPN to feed with no loss of area coverage.

If I'm being totally honest, I don't think 24 is likely for anyone right now. Maybe one day, but probably not in the next go around. I do think some combination of consolidation and promotion of select properties could take place though.

Speaking of Wake Forest, I think it would probably be better for the ACC to encourage them to drop football and perhaps then move to the Big East for example where they could stand out a little better and not be in the shadow of all the other NC schools...much less be worried about spending to keep up with them. The ACC could bring in 2 full members from untapped markets, get a new commitment from Notre Dame to go in full and you've got a nice well rounded 16. Or perhaps a jumping off point for more...