As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

It isn't a merger with that many teams left out. It would be easier for the Pac 12 to grab four from the Big 12. Texas gets Arizona State and one in-state addition (substitute Houston here if you wish) in their division. The West Division keeps Washington State and Oregon State.

The six schools left in the Big 12 raid the American:
West - Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Tulsa, Navy*
East - SMU, Houston, USF, UCF, West Virginia, Iowa State

(Texas Tech to PAC 16 in this example)

The American then does C-USA a solid:
North - Connecticut, Cincinnati, Temple, Old Dominion, Marshall
South - Tulane, Memphis, East Carolina, FAU, FIU

Which leaves C-USA with the following:
West - UTEP, UTSA, North Texas, Rice, Louisiana Tech
East - Southern Miss, UAB, WKU, Middle Tennessee, Charlotte

(09-24-2017 07:39 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  It isn't a merger with that many teams left out. It would be easier for the Pac 12 to grab four from the Big 12. Texas gets Arizona State and one in-state addition (substitute Houston here if you wish) in their division. The West Division keeps Washington State and Oregon State.

The six schools left in the Big 12 raid the American:
West - Baylor, TCU, Oklahoma State, Kansas State, Tulsa, Navy*
East - SMU, Houston, USF, UCF, West Virginia, Iowa State

(Texas Tech to PAC 16 in this example)

The American then does C-USA a solid:
North - Connecticut, Cincinnati, Temple, Old Dominion, Marshall
South - Tulane, Memphis, East Carolina, FAU, FIU

Which leaves C-USA with the following:
West - UTEP, UTSA, North Texas, Rice, Louisiana Tech
East - Southern Miss, UAB, WKU, Middle Tennessee, Charlotte

16 is unwieldy though, and contraction is coming. See the old Southwest Conference.

(09-24-2017 07:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

I like it. Strong brands. Only 1 team in the small states. My first reaction is you'd want more than one team in Texas - maybe 3 teams (add TCU and Texas Tech?) - but I could be convinced to stick with just the Longhorns, though (with A&M in the SEC).

If Texas is willing they just resurrect the old Pac 16 idea substituting the already admitted Utah for A&M.

The longhorn network will have to be addressed as that contract is not expiring. Possibly partner with ESPN to get better distribution for PAC 12 network. Texas may be flexible about what the network actually is if they really want out of the Big 12, and as long as they get paid

Pac-12 - B-12 merger boat has sailed
Pac-12 has to take care of thier promblems in house
Droping 6 sub networks would be huge start & moving operations to Utah
overhead in LA is killing them

Expanding with Hous [the only way Pac-12 gets in Tex] & Hawaii.
with Hawaii excecption is 6 extra FB games along with extra olympic sports

SCH better, BYU brings ton of fans.
Taking advantage of NFL stadiums in area

(09-24-2017 07:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

Wont happen. I feel like deja vu back to the summer of 2010. Texas and Oklahoma arent coming to the PAC 12, and even if they wanted to they can't bring Ok St, TCU, Baylor and Texas Tech with them.--which they would insist on doing.
The PAC TV contract ends in 2024. The Big 12 TV contract ends in 2025.
We have a while to go.

A UT/OU combination, along with two other schools, would absolutely help increase the value of the PAC, while also increasing the net return of UT/OU. It would get the PAC into the central time zone, also allowing for more content to be shown, and getting them two power programs for football. If the PAC and UT can work out an arrangement that settles the LHN, and provides benefit for both sides, it is a clear win/win for all involved.

PAC-16 Pacific
California
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State

PAC-16 Southwest
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah

(09-25-2017 09:10 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  A UT/OU combination, along with two other schools, would absolutely help increase the value of the PAC, while also increasing the net return of UT/OU. It would get the PAC into the central time zone, also allowing for more content to be shown, and getting them two power programs for football. If the PAC and UT can work out an arrangement that settles the LHN, and provides benefit for both sides, it is a clear win/win for all involved.

PAC-16 Pacific
California
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State

PAC-16 Southwest
Arizona
Arizona State
Colorado
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas Tech
Utah

Not a bad line-up for sure. I wouldn't mind seeing this. Outside of stretching with Mountain West schools or the B1G taking on many of the PAC schools, this is probably the way to go for the conference to remain competitive. ESPN would have a cow but perhaps the PAC would allow Texas to maintain the LHN.

If 18, 20, or 24 became the "new normal" down the road, then the PAC could look at investing in a couple Mountain West / American schools and bringing on some XII leftovers. Presuming Kansas is gone and West Virginia is not an option, and these schools are available:

17. TCU
18. Houston
19. Kansas St
20. Iowa St
21. New Mexico
22. UNLV
23. San Diego St
24. Boise St

If 24...

Pacific: California, Stanford, USC, UCLA, San Diego St, UNLV
Northwest: Washington, Washington St, Oregon, Oregon St, Utah, Boise St
Southwest: Arizona, Arizona St, Colorado, New Mexico, TCU, Houston
Central: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, Iowa St

(09-24-2017 07:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

As far as I can tell, PAC 12 bylaws don't spell out procedures for deciding to dissolve the conference. They do, however, specify that their bylaws can be changed by a three-fourths vote of the CEO Group, which consists of the CEOs of each of the 12 members.

So, theoretically, the nine current PAC members in your scenario could vote to dissolve. However, from a political standpoint, that would require that three of them (Washington, Oregon and Arizona) would have to vote in essence to expel their land grant brothers, leaving them outside the power conference structure. I think the odds of this happening are extremely remote.

So, as attractive as such a new 12 team grouping might sound, it isn't going to happen any time soon.

Just for giggles, if the 4 Big 12 schools left, why would the remaining six schools add Tulsa, Navy, SMU, Houston, USF, and UCF?

I would think that UC, BYU, SDSU, Colorado State and Boise St would be much higher on the pecking order than Tulsa, Navy and SMU. BYU and UC would probably be locks, along with Houston. I think you would be looking at 1 more. Probably need to keep the conference smaller at first to see how revenues pan out. I can see the argument for USF and UCF. Navy isn't a good fit location wise. Air Force would be better. Regarding Tulsa and SMU, they add little to any conference, especially one already having a school in the Dallas metroplex. Tulsa and SMU are small schools with small fan bases. Can't see the leftovers being all that interested, except if Baylor and TCU arm twist to add schools which at somewhat similar. Still, why would TCU want competition so close to their home market?

(09-24-2017 07:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

You could make a pretty decent conference with some of the leftovers:

WEST: Washington St., Oregon St., Arizona St., Colorado St., San Diego St., Boise St.
EAST: Oklahoma St., Kansas St., Iowa St., Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor (or Houston)

(09-25-2017 12:11 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(09-24-2017 07:01 PM)shizzle787 Wrote:  As many of you know, the Big 12 and Pac 12 having expiring TV contracts around the same time. Texas and Oklahoma are both unhappy in their current situation, and the Pac 12 schools don't make enough. Here is my scenario of a merger that would blow up the college world:
West: Oregon, Washington, UCLA, USC, Cal, Stanford
East: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Colorado, Utah

They would play most of the games with a more favorable (Texas) time slot.

What do you think?

You could make a pretty decent conference with some of the leftovers:

WEST: Washington St., Oregon St., Arizona St., Colorado St., San Diego St., Boise St.
EAST: Oklahoma St., Kansas St., Iowa St., Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor (or Houston)

If this lineup were to occur, I think Houston would get the call over Baylor.

We would have 3 Western-based conferences again (PAC, XII, MWC). The American would likely backfill Houston with Baylor. MWC would backfill with CUSA Texas schools. CUSA would backfill to 12 with Texas St to replace the 3 lost Texas schools.

PAC
West: Washington, Oregon, California, Stanford, USC, UCLA
East: Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas

XII
West: Washington St, Oregon St, Arizona St, San Diego St, Boise St, Colorado St
East: Houston, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma St, Kansas St, Iowa St

MWC
West: Hawaii, San Jose St, Fresno St, Nevada, UNLV, Utah St
East: Wyoming, Air Force, New Mexico, UTEP, UTSA, Rice

CUSA
West: Texas St, North Texas, Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, UAB, Middle Tennessee St
East: Florida Atlantic, Florida International, Charlotte, Old Dominion, Marshall, Western Kentucky
*MTSU/WKU protected rivalry*

Just why is conference speculation so much fun? We all seem to eat this stuff up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(09-25-2017 11:49 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Just why is conference speculation so much fun? We all seem to eat this stuff up.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Reminds me of the way women like to rearrange furniture.

If you're going to have 16 teams -- where 14 is more than enough -- you'll want to break it up into 4 divisions within (like NFC/AFC style conference). I'm not a fan of that, but that'd at least justify the Ridiculousness of going 16 teams in one conference when you play only 75% of regular season games as NFL, with WAY WAY more teams than NFL, too.

The less teams you play in your conference, the less weight on being an undisputed champ there is. The more teams you play in your conference, the less OOC games there are, which makes it harder to rank/judge in a sea of 130.

Also, if teams strip out of the AAC, they likely won't just go CUSA anymore. They'll be aiming for the MAC too, which will piss me off. :) I like the MAC being old-school, the way it should be. Then the MAC will realign with others and things will get weird there, too. Uggh.

Personally, I'd like to see it go 12 max. That obviously isn't happening, so 14 max as it stands is my final straw. :) But going 16 IMO should be *max* unless you're going to have 16 regular season games like the NFL or something. 4 divisions of 4 teams + an extra week in Championship Week for 2-game playoff for it. But I see no reason for it.

Real Potential Changes:
- B12 to expand to 12.
(+2 teams from AAC [Houston/Memphis/Cinci/Tulsa])

- AAC then takes 2 teams elsewhere
(+Marshall and LA-Tech from CUSA)

- CUSA then takes 2 teams from Sun Belt
(+[Troy/Ark-State/App-State/GA-Southern])

- SunBelt then takes 2 teams from D1AA to go 10 teams, or 4 D1AAs to go 12 teams (Liberty then asks to join)

(09-26-2017 08:53 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  If you're going to have 16 teams -- where 14 is more than enough -- you'll want to break it up into 4 divisions within (like NFC/AFC style conference). I'm not a fan of that, but that'd at least justify the Ridiculousness of going 16 teams in one conference when you play only 75% of regular season games as NFL, with WAY WAY more teams than NFL, too.

The less teams you play in your conference, the less weight on being an undisputed champ there is. The more teams you play in your conference, the less OOC games there are, which makes it harder to rank/judge in a sea of 130.

Also, if teams strip out of the AAC, they likely won't just go CUSA anymore. They'll be aiming for the MAC too, which will piss me off. :) I like the MAC being old-school, the way it should be. Then the MAC will realign with others and things will get weird there, too. Uggh.

Personally, I'd like to see it go 12 max. That obviously isn't happening, so 14 max as it stands is my final straw. :) But going 16 IMO should be *max* unless you're going to have 16 regular season games like the NFL or something. 4 divisions of 4 teams + an extra week in Championship Week for 2-game playoff for it. But I see no reason for it.

Real Potential Changes:
- B12 to expand to 12.
(+2 teams from AAC [Houston/Memphis/Cinci/Tulsa])

- AAC then takes 2 teams elsewhere
(+Marshall and LA-Tech from CUSA)

- CUSA then takes 2 teams from Sun Belt
(+[Troy/Ark-State/App-State/GA-Southern])

- SunBelt then takes 2 teams from D1AA to go 10 teams, or 4 D1AAs to go 12 teams (Liberty then asks to join)

If you have a 16-team conference using a rotating 4-team pod schedule, you can play all the teams in your conference within 2 years, as opposed to the 6 years it currently takes some 14-team conferences.

Also, if the American picks off 2 from C-USA, they might say "thank you" and leave it at 12.

The lesser teams in same division does, I think your point is, make your every-year committed teams Lessen, yeah. That is a good thing about having smaller divisions as opposed to big ones, which is happening now.

I know the standard though, in the MAC (12 teams; 3 games in other division of 6) -- you pay in 2's. Home 1 year, Home 2nd year, then a new mixup of teams playing.

I would assume the 4 divisions of 4 teams would probably do the same, tho. So I don't think their aim is to burn through as many Different teams as possible as quickly... especially when they're split up, you'll probably have a cross divisional rivalry of sorts there too... and they'll want home-away setups on solid ground, so I can see it going in 2s like it is now.