(05-19-2018 10:23 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 12:13 AM)joeben69 Wrote:  If The Pac-12 Breaks Up, Here’s Where Every School Would Land
https://thespun.com/pac-12/conference-re...12-breakup

In which case the Big 10 will be renamed to "The Sea to Shining Sea Conference"

The OP has it wrong about Colorado. They are doing better in the PAC than B12 because its an easier FB conference.

Another real out of the box expansion combo would be if the B1G were to go to 16 with Colorado and Kansas. Add to the national appeal of the B1G network while not disrupting the balance of power in the FB conference.

Then you would be looking at the following membership totals:

B1G-16
PAC-11
B12-9

-The issue about placing Kansas in the PAC is solved if they go B1G.

-PAC would have an extra spot to go to 16.

-USC would have more incentive to go independent. However they could have their own network in the B12.

-B12 could go to 18 with the addition of 9 western schools.

B12 western expansion..B18

Colorado St
Utah
Arizona St
UCLA
USC
Stanford
Cal
Oregon
Washington

Washington St, Oregon St, Arizona aren't picked up because they don't add enough market wise for the FB conference. They could reload the PAC with Boise, BYU, Hawaii, SDSU, UNM, UNLV, Air Force.

MWC then down to 6 could then take NMSU, UTEP to get back to 8. NMSU would definitely move to the MWC in this case. UTEP would probably do it because of a smaller money split in the MWC.

Definitely a western shakeup for sure.

(05-19-2018 11:00 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 10:23 AM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 12:13 AM)joeben69 Wrote:  If The Pac-12 Breaks Up, Here’s Where Every School Would Land
https://thespun.com/pac-12/conference-re...12-breakup

In which case the Big 10 will be renamed to "The Sea to Shining Sea Conference"

The OP has it wrong about Colorado. They are doing better in the PAC than B12 because its an easier FB conference.

Another real out of the box expansion combo would be if the B1G were to go to 16 with Colorado and Kansas. Add to the national appeal of the B1G network while not disrupting the balance of power in the FB conference.

Then you would be looking at the following membership totals:

B1G-16
PAC-11
B12-9

-The issue about placing Kansas in the PAC is solved if they go B1G.

-PAC would have an extra spot to go to 16.

-USC would have more incentive to go independent. However they could have their own network in the B12.

-B12 could go to 18 with the addition of 9 western schools.

B12 western expansion..B18

Colorado St
Utah
Arizona St
UCLA
USC
Stanford
Cal
Oregon
Washington

Washington St, Oregon St, Arizona aren't picked up because they don't add enough market wise for the FB conference. They could reload the PAC with Boise, BYU, Hawaii, SDSU, UNM, UNLV, Air Force.

MWC then down to 6 could then take NMSU, UTEP to get back to 8. NMSU would defini% tely move to the MWC in this case. UTEP would probably do it because of a smaller money split in the MWC.

Definitely a western shakeup for sure.

Wouldn't be enough to break the Pac-12, in this hypothetical lose Colorado and they would just backfill with Colorado State/New Mexico or even just continue on as an 11 team league.

In general the Pac-12 may have issues but losing schools to realignment isn't one of them and won't be one of them until/unless the Big Ten decided they wanted to turn their sight to the Pacific Coast.

(05-19-2018 10:27 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 02:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  West Virginia would be the the 16th for the ACC. They say no, but their academics are not too different from that of Louisville, they reconnect the ACC footprint, and they are good in hoops and football and would be a compromise choice of the current ACC members.

West Virginia's academics are way different than Louisville which is a public commuter school.

At this point the ACC could really use WVU's rivalry ability ability across the conference.

WVU-Pittsburgh
WVU-Virginia Tech
WVU-Louisville
WVU-Syracuse
WVU-Clemson

There is a lot of places around the ACC where WVU in town is an important game.

The ACC can’t use the academic argument against West Virginia anymore when they decided to invite Louisville in 2012. They might have other arguments or bias against the Mountaineers but academics is not of them. If academics were so important, UConn or Cincinnati would be in the ACC instead of Louisville.

In the unlikely event the Pac were to lose a school (e.g., Colorado), would they ever seriously consider adding BYU or Boise State as football-only affiliates? Pac football benefits, and the lack of full membership makes the add more palatable to the elite Pac schools that would prefer not to associate with such lesser schools.

If all they lose are Colorado and Kansas they'll continue on as separate entities, as neither of them would kill their respective conference, nor will these compel the remnants to merge operations.

Simply, the PAC replaces CU with CSU. CSU is a R1: Research Universities (Highest research activity) institution. Their endowment is a bit low compared to the remaining PAC schools but that would go up over time with exposure and alumni engagement. More importantly, the PAC keeps their presence in that state and get themselves back to 12 for scheduling purposes. What would be interesting is who the Big 12 get to replace Kansas. That's assuming that OU and UT stay put. With Kansas gone the plains block would be even weaker than when Nebraska left, so the list of programs may expand. They may just get one to get back to 10. I could see Central Florida as a compromise pick, both for the Florida market and for better football cred.

No matter, though. Kansas leaves with Oklahoma or they stay put. I don't see Colorado leaving for the Big Ten, without a slew of PAC programs joining.

(05-16-2018 10:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-16-2018 07:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-16-2018 02:42 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The logical order of business (hahahaha college athletics and logic) would be some form of Pac-12/Big XII merger.

I think what makes a crap ton more sense if you view it through the lens of a college president is a partial merger with the Big 10. Philosophically more aligned. Makes more sense to put 26 schools under one administrative blanket, can most of the Pac-12 staff. Build in some non-conference games on top of the conference slate, maybe a sport or two compete under one umbrella like women's lacrosse and men's rowing.

Or the 4 California schools, UW and CU to the Big 10 X 2.
W-USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, UW
C-CU, NU, IA, WI, MN
E-PSU, RU, MD, IU, PU
N-tosu, UM, MSU, IL, NW

Maybe just a shift Eastward would work.

Colorado and Kansas to the Big 10.

Big 10:

Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

Now your conference playoffs would likely feature annual pairings of Nebraska/Iowa, Michigan/Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State/Penn State
***************************************************************************************************************

Big 12 adds Arizona, Arizona State, California, Oregon, Stanford, U.C.L.A., U.S.C., Utah, Washington to go to 16.

Big 12:

California, Oregon, Stanford, Washington

Arizona, Arizona State, U.C.L.A., U.S.C.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Baylor, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah


Now their conference playoffs will likely yield these pairings:
Stanford/Washington/Oregon, U.S.C./U.C.L.A., Oklahoma/O.S.U./K.S.U., Texas/Utah.
******************************************************************************************************

The SEC adds T.C.U. and West Virginia.


SEC:

Arkansas, Missouri, T.C.U., Texas A&M

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina

Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia


Now the SEC's championship pairings likely look like this:

T.C.U./Texas A&M, Alabama/L.S.U., Auburn/Florida/Georgia/South Carolina (pick em). Tennessee/West Virginia
***************************************************************************************************

ACC adds Notre Dame in full and gives UConn the inclusion they've been hoping for.

ACC:

Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Syracuse

Louisville, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

This will yield pairings like this:

Notre Dame/Syracuse, Louisville/Va Tech, North Carolina/N.C. State, Clemson/Florida State/Miami

Now that's particularly important for keeping all areas of the ACC engaged until the end of the football season which by keeping it regional keeps everyone attending and watching deep into the season.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This kind of alignment gives the Big 12/PAC schools the size of a market needed for a strong conference network and the branding they need to keep their content value up.

The Big 10 picks up Denver as a market and gets to adopt the birthplace of college basketball as part of their heritage.

The SEC gets into DFW and adds a school that has a slither of the beltway. Both are competitive in most sports already.

The ACC gets a bigger slice of New England and picks up a true blue blood who will now have a reasonably easy access to the conference football semi finals every year.
**************************************************************************************************************

Now we have a P4 that is more balanced in terms of brand and content and earning power and which are competitively a bit more balanced.

But the value to the Big 10 would be the CA schools.

Oklahoma, Kansas, Stanford, UCLA, Washington, Arizona to the B1G? I've seen stupider ideas...

(05-19-2018 07:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-16-2018 10:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-16-2018 07:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(05-16-2018 02:42 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The logical order of business (hahahaha college athletics and logic) would be some form of Pac-12/Big XII merger.

I think what makes a crap ton more sense if you view it through the lens of a college president is a partial merger with the Big 10. Philosophically more aligned. Makes more sense to put 26 schools under one administrative blanket, can most of the Pac-12 staff. Build in some non-conference games on top of the conference slate, maybe a sport or two compete under one umbrella like women's lacrosse and men's rowing.

Or the 4 California schools, UW and CU to the Big 10 X 2.
W-USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal, UW
C-CU, NU, IA, WI, MN
E-PSU, RU, MD, IU, PU
N-tosu, UM, MSU, IL, NW

Maybe just a shift Eastward would work.

Colorado and Kansas to the Big 10.

Big 10:

Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers

Now your conference playoffs would likely feature annual pairings of Nebraska/Iowa, Michigan/Michigan State, Wisconsin, Ohio State/Penn State
***************************************************************************************************************

Big 12 adds Arizona, Arizona State, California, Oregon, Stanford, U.C.L.A., U.S.C., Utah, Washington to go to 16.

Big 12:

California, Oregon, Stanford, Washington

Arizona, Arizona State, U.C.L.A., U.S.C.

Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Baylor, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah


Now their conference playoffs will likely yield these pairings:
Stanford/Washington/Oregon, U.S.C./U.C.L.A., Oklahoma/O.S.U./K.S.U., Texas/Utah.
******************************************************************************************************

The SEC adds T.C.U. and West Virginia.


SEC:

Arkansas, Missouri, T.C.U., Texas A&M

Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Auburn, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina

Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia


Now the SEC's championship pairings likely look like this:

T.C.U./Texas A&M, Alabama/L.S.U., Auburn/Florida/Georgia/South Carolina (pick em). Tennessee/West Virginia
***************************************************************************************************

ACC adds Notre Dame in full and gives UConn the inclusion they've been hoping for.

ACC:

Boston College, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Syracuse

Louisville, Pittsburgh, Virginia, Virginia Tech

Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Wake Forest

Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami

This will yield pairings like this:

Notre Dame/Syracuse, Louisville/Va Tech, North Carolina/N.C. State, Clemson/Florida State/Miami

Now that's particularly important for keeping all areas of the ACC engaged until the end of the football season which by keeping it regional keeps everyone attending and watching deep into the season.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This kind of alignment gives the Big 12/PAC schools the size of a market needed for a strong conference network and the branding they need to keep their content value up.

The Big 10 picks up Denver as a market and gets to adopt the birthplace of college basketball as part of their heritage.

The SEC gets into DFW and adds a school that has a slither of the beltway. Both are competitive in most sports already.

The ACC gets a bigger slice of New England and picks up a true blue blood who will now have a reasonably easy access to the conference football semi finals every year.
**************************************************************************************************************

Now we have a P4 that is more balanced in terms of brand and content and earning power and which are competitively a bit more balanced.

But the value to the Big 10 would be the CA schools.

Well as the Stones once said, "You can't always get what you want!" The SEC is not getting a prize in that alignment either. That's sort of the whole concept here Bullet. The Big 12 becomes much more competitive with markets and brands while the Big 10 and SEC pick up nice niche markets and balance out their divisions. The ACC gets some added value and you are done.

(05-17-2018 07:53 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  The Conference of Champions is not going anywhere. I can see the ACC going down before the Pac-12. They don’t have any competition out West, the MWC is no longer a threat and the Big XII is far enough geographically. It’s just a different culture out West, that’s it. And no, the Arizona schools will NOT consider the Big XII. Why leave a good conference in order to be at the mercy of Texas and to some extent Oklahoma? All they have to do is ask Colorado who couldn’t wait to get out of a Texas shadow. If they’re still not convinced, they can call Big Ten newbie Nebraska.

The P12 has a lot of competition. Everybody wants TV dollars. 80% of the US population is in the eastern and central time zones. That is 2-3 hours difference. There is a very narrow window on weeknights and Saturdays to get their games on national TV unless they accept alternative start times. Even then they are competing with the the conferences in those areas. Are people in Alabama going to tune in a P12 game over a 2nd tier SEC game? I think most would choose Vandy vs Ole Miss over any P12 game.

(05-17-2018 07:53 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  The Conference of Champions is not going anywhere. I can see the ACC going down before the Pac-12. They don’t have any competition out West, the MWC is no longer a threat and the Big XII is far enough geographically. It’s just a different culture out West, that’s it. And no, the Arizona schools will NOT consider the Big XII. Why leave a good conference in order to be at the mercy of Texas and to some extent Oklahoma? All they have to do is ask Colorado who couldn’t wait to get out of a Texas shadow. If they’re still not convinced, they can call Big Ten newbie Nebraska.

(05-19-2018 02:06 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 10:27 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 02:09 AM)JRsec Wrote:  West Virginia would be the the 16th for the ACC. They say no, but their academics are not too different from that of Louisville, they reconnect the ACC footprint, and they are good in hoops and football and would be a compromise choice of the current ACC members.

West Virginia's academics are way different than Louisville which is a public commuter school.

At this point the ACC could really use WVU's rivalry ability ability across the conference.

WVU-Pittsburgh
WVU-Virginia Tech
WVU-Louisville
WVU-Syracuse
WVU-Clemson

There is a lot of places around the ACC where WVU in town is an important game.

The ACC can’t use the academic argument against West Virginia anymore when they decided to invite Louisville in 2012. They might have other arguments or bias against the Mountaineers but academics is not of them. If academics were so important, UConn or Cincinnati would be in the ACC instead of Louisville.

If academics is the only issue, and it is NOT, the simple solution for the ACC is to say, "We support the education of all, not just 1 percenters."

(05-17-2018 10:29 AM)orangefan Wrote:  I would not read this as suggesting the P12 is about to break up. It's more likely saying that the P12 needs to do something dramatic to keep up with the Joneses (i.e., the B1G and the SEC). I continue to believe that they are likely to be the predators, with the B12 as their targets. The P12 and B12 have TV contracts coming up in the same window (2024 +/-). The B12 has its own well documented fractures. Bringing in some Central Time Zone, name brand, and big population state (i.e., Texas) schools would solve a lot of problems for the P12. They've known this for a long time, as evidenced by their effort to go to 16 back in the 2010-2011 time frame.

Finally, someone talking sense.

The Big 12 has more revenue right now, but less of a future. The Pac 12 raiding the Big 12 is significantly more likely than the other way around.

There are some obvious impediments the PAC faces when trying to lure any BigXII schools to join. Primarily, those BigXII schools are either going to

A) want to bring all their friends along, essentially forming a conference in name only where the divisions are nearly completely separated, and also replicating all the strife and division that has marred the existing of the BigXII while simultaneously bringing enough mouths to feed so as to dilute any revenue advantage.

B) demand priority cross conference access to SoCal exposure thereby jeopardizing the California round robin agreement and reducing SoCal exposure for the remaining non-CA PAC members.

Neither solution works.

But if the seeds of chaos are seen and schools in both the PAC and BigXII are convinced that there is the eminent possibility of being left behind, then a more parsimonious solution can be reached. If UT and USC decide that they’re going to be in a conference together, then

A) there will be a requisite 6 other FBS schools willing to hitch their wagon to those horses.

B) the money will be there regardless of who the other 6 are.

C) once they get to 8, they’ll be able to put together a full conference from the PAC and BigXII, and that conference will measure up well against the B1G or SEC.

Not saying that there’s a will to do this, but there definitely is a way.

(05-21-2018 02:22 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  There are some obvious impediments the PAC faces when trying to lure any BigXII schools to join. Primarily, those BigXII schools are either going to

A) want to bring all their friends along, essentially forming a conference in name only where the divisions are nearly completely separated, and also replicating all the strife and division that has marred the existing of the BigXII while simultaneously bringing enough mouths to feed so as to dilute any revenue advantage.

B) demand priority cross conference access to SoCal exposure thereby jeopardizing the California round robin agreement and reducing SoCal exposure for the remaining non-CA PAC members.

Neither solution works.

But if the seeds of chaos are seen and schools in both the PAC and BigXII are convinced that there is the eminent possibility of being left behind, then a more parsimonious solution can be reached. If UT and USC decide that they’re going to be in a conference together, then

A) there will be a requisite 6 other FBS schools willing to hitch their wagon to those horses.

B) the money will be there regardless of who the other 6 are.

C) once they get to 8, they’ll be able to put together a full conference from the PAC and BigXII, and that conference will measure up well against the B1G or SEC.

Not saying that there’s a will to do this, but there definitely is a way.

So perhaps something like this is what you are suggesting:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Utah

Arizona, Arizona State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas,
Texas Tech

In 2024-5 it is highly possible for both conferences to dissolve and reorganiz with the selected schools. Sign a new charter, a new GOR, adopt new logos and a new conference name.

Oregon State, Washington State, Baylor, T.C.U., Iowa State, and West Virginia would then be on the market for new conference homes.

If the Big 10 wants a Colorado presence then the Rams are available.

If the SEC wants a DFW presence we have T.C.U. to do it with.

If the ACC wants to reconnect its footprint then West Virginia is there for the taking.

It also opens up possible niche market additions from the existing G5.

What would the Big 10 do for that #16th slot? Would they look at AAU member Iowa State? Would they look to UConn? Would the SEC take a serious look at E.C.U. or South Florida for #16. Would the ACC pass on WVU and take Cincinnati?

What it would accomplish is a NCAA football world in which neither the SEC or Big 10 get significantly richer and the the new PAC/Big 12 amalgamation does become an equal while the ACC picks up a little ground.

Or, It might "eventually" lead to a P3.

Let's say that the PAC/Big 12 new creation becomes a reality. Then a future shift to 18 member conferences (3 divisions of 6) might yield a P3 as solid as this one:

Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, Washington

A natural rotation of the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other two divisions would satisfy the most Eastern division and keep everyone in the other two divisions tied to Southern California exposure. 1 permanent rival would be needed however.

Then the Big 10 could do something like this:

Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Virginia

Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Outside of Georgia Tech and Boston College who are laggards in earning potential and attendance this nails the East Coast Alumni bases of the Big 10. Nebraska makes room for this to happen. It restores normalcy to the old core Big 10 while embracing essentially a division from the Northeast and Northern Mid Atlantic.


And an SEC that look like this emerges:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Clemson, Florida State, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

This keeps all SEC schools active in Florida or Texas for recruiting and groups the most important rivals. The SEC would need to move to a 10 game conference schedule. Play the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other divisions in rotation. But one permanent rival would still be needed to satisfy the membership.


Either way there would be more balanced in revenue, and in competition.

(05-21-2018 04:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-21-2018 02:22 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  There are some obvious impediments the PAC faces when trying to lure any BigXII schools to join. Primarily, those BigXII schools are either going to

A) want to bring all their friends along, essentially forming a conference in name only where the divisions are nearly completely separated, and also replicating all the strife and division that has marred the existing of the BigXII while simultaneously bringing enough mouths to feed so as to dilute any revenue advantage.

B) demand priority cross conference access to SoCal exposure thereby jeopardizing the California round robin agreement and reducing SoCal exposure for the remaining non-CA PAC members.

Neither solution works.

But if the seeds of chaos are seen and schools in both the PAC and BigXII are convinced that there is the eminent possibility of being left behind, then a more parsimonious solution can be reached. If UT and USC decide that they’re going to be in a conference together, then

A) there will be a requisite 6 other FBS schools willing to hitch their wagon to those horses.

B) the money will be there regardless of who the other 6 are.

C) once they get to 8, they’ll be able to put together a full conference from the PAC and BigXII, and that conference will measure up well against the B1G or SEC.

Not saying that there’s a will to do this, but there definitely is a way.

So perhaps something like this is what you are suggesting:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Utah

Arizona, Arizona State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas,
Texas Tech

In 2024-5 it is highly possible for both conferences to dissolve and reorganiz with the selected schools. Sign a new charter, a new GOR, adopt new logos and a new conference name.

Oregon State, Washington State, Baylor, T.C.U., Iowa State, and West Virginia would then be on the market for new conference homes.

If the Big 10 wants a Colorado presence then the Rams are available.

If the SEC wants a DFW presence we have T.C.U. to do it with.

If the ACC wants to reconnect its footprint then West Virginia is there for the taking.

It also opens up possible niche market additions from the existing G5.

What would the Big 10 do for that #16th slot? Would they look at AAU member Iowa State? Would they look to UConn? Would the SEC take a serious look at E.C.U. or South Florida for #16. Would the ACC pass on WVU and take Cincinnati?

What it would accomplish is a NCAA football world in which neither the SEC or Big 10 get significantly richer and the the new PAC/Big 12 amalgamation does become an equal while the ACC picks up a little ground.

Or, It might "eventually" lead to a P3.

Let's say that the PAC/Big 12 new creation becomes a reality. Then a future shift to 18 member conferences (3 divisions of 6) might yield a P3 as solid as this one:

Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, Washington

A natural rotation of the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other two divisions would satisfy the most Eastern division and keep everyone in the other two divisions tied to Southern California exposure. 1 permanent rival would be needed however.

Then the Big 10 could do something like this:

Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Virginia

Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Outside of Georgia Tech and Boston College who are laggards in earning potential and attendance this nails the East Coast Alumni bases of the Big 10. Nebraska makes room for this to happen. It restores normalcy to the old core Big 10 while embracing essentially a division from the Northeast and Northern Mid Atlantic.


And an SEC that look like this emerges:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Clemson, Florida State, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

This keeps all SEC schools active in Florida or Texas for recruiting and groups the most important rivals. The SEC would need to move to a 10 game conference schedule. Play the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other divisions in rotation. But one permanent rival would still be needed to satisfy the membership.


Either way there would be more balanced in revenue, and in competition.

With that SEC setup, I would think only a few protected crossovers would be necessary: UF/FSU, Alabama/LSU, and maybe UK/UT.

(05-21-2018 04:24 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-21-2018 02:22 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  There are some obvious impediments the PAC faces when trying to lure any BigXII schools to join. Primarily, those BigXII schools are either going to

A) want to bring all their friends along, essentially forming a conference in name only where the divisions are nearly completely separated, and also replicating all the strife and division that has marred the existing of the BigXII while simultaneously bringing enough mouths to feed so as to dilute any revenue advantage.

B) demand priority cross conference access to SoCal exposure thereby jeopardizing the California round robin agreement and reducing SoCal exposure for the remaining non-CA PAC members.

Neither solution works.

But if the seeds of chaos are seen and schools in both the PAC and BigXII are convinced that there is the eminent possibility of being left behind, then a more parsimonious solution can be reached. If UT and USC decide that they’re going to be in a conference together, then

A) there will be a requisite 6 other FBS schools willing to hitch their wagon to those horses.

B) the money will be there regardless of who the other 6 are.

C) once they get to 8, they’ll be able to put together a full conference from the PAC and BigXII, and that conference will measure up well against the B1G or SEC.

Not saying that there’s a will to do this, but there definitely is a way.

So perhaps something like this is what you are suggesting:

California, Cal Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Utah

Arizona, Arizona State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas,
Texas Tech

In 2024-5 it is highly possible for both conferences to dissolve and reorganiz with the selected schools. Sign a new charter, a new GOR, adopt new logos and a new conference name.

Oregon State, Washington State, Baylor, T.C.U., Iowa State, and West Virginia would then be on the market for new conference homes.

If the Big 10 wants a Colorado presence then the Rams are available.

If the SEC wants a DFW presence we have T.C.U. to do it with.

If the ACC wants to reconnect its footprint then West Virginia is there for the taking.

It also opens up possible niche market additions from the existing G5.

What would the Big 10 do for that #16th slot? Would they look at AAU member Iowa State? Would they look to UConn? Would the SEC take a serious look at E.C.U. or South Florida for #16. Would the ACC pass on WVU and take Cincinnati?

What it would accomplish is a NCAA football world in which neither the SEC or Big 10 get significantly richer and the the new PAC/Big 12 amalgamation does become an equal while the ACC picks up a little ground.

Or, It might "eventually" lead to a P3.

Let's say that the PAC/Big 12 new creation becomes a reality. Then a future shift to 18 member conferences (3 divisions of 6) might yield a P3 as solid as this one:

Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Southern Cal, Texas, Texas Tech

California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Stanford, Utah, Washington

A natural rotation of the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other two divisions would satisfy the most Eastern division and keep everyone in the other two divisions tied to Southern California exposure. 1 permanent rival would be needed however.

Then the Big 10 could do something like this:

Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Virginia

Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Outside of Georgia Tech and Boston College who are laggards in earning potential and attendance this nails the East Coast Alumni bases of the Big 10. Nebraska makes room for this to happen. It restores normalcy to the old core Big 10 while embracing essentially a division from the Northeast and Northern Mid Atlantic.


And an SEC that look like this emerges:

Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, T.C.U.

Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

Clemson, Florida State, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

This keeps all SEC schools active in Florida or Texas for recruiting and groups the most important rivals. The SEC would need to move to a 10 game conference schedule. Play the 5 division games and 2 each from each of the other divisions in rotation. But one permanent rival would still be needed to satisfy the membership.


Either way there would be more balanced in revenue, and in competition.

I have a hard time believing Louisville would not make the cut somewhere

They'd make the cut. These morons all just like to pick on Louisville. There's still idiots around here that think UConn would be more valuable.

(05-22-2018 08:19 AM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  They'd make the cut. These morons all just like to pick on Louisville. There's still idiots around here that think UConn would be more valuable.

They'd make the cut over whom? Clemson? Florida State?

BTW, I don't have anything against Louisville, but if most of their fans are as insulting as you, I'd definitely understand why someone wouldn't like them.

(05-18-2018 09:40 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Pac-16 East:
-Texas
-Oklahoma
-Colorado
-Utah
-Arizona
-Arizona State
-Texas Tech
-Oklahoma State

The Pac-16 West would’ve been the original Pac-8.

This was the plan in 2010 with Utah replacing A&M. As I recall, the Arizona schools screamed bloody murder about being separated from the California schools.

More like this:
Texas and USC decide to go independent. They get together to determine where to park Olympic sports and pitch the idea to the PAC and to the remaining CA PAC schools separately. UCLA, Stanford, and Cal decide they can pull off FBS independence as well and agree to form a non-FBS conference with USC and UT. They need one more member (#6) and BYU says they’ll drop the Sunday play and BYU-TV requirements to make it happen. So UT, USC, Cal, UCLA, and Stanford formally announce that they are withdrawing from their conferences and will be FBS independents. OU shops the OU/OSU pairing to the SEC, and it’s declined. OU then has the ammunition to leave OSU behind, and OU (rather than BYU) joins as member number 6 in a non-FBS conference.

That 6 member conference has more NCAA titles than any other conference and with 5 built-in games against each other has no problem filling out an FBS schedule.

The PAC invites SDSU and the remaining BigXII members sans WVU to become a 16 school conference. The footprint is good, and the money is still far beyond the AAC securing their place in the autonomy 5.

That arrangement plays out for a while. The cream rises to the top in the new PAC16, and schools are gradually plucked off the top to join the Indy6 which transitions into a full FBS conference. When the ACC GoR expires it gets picked apart by the B1G and SEC, and you’re left with a Power 3 setup and a pair of eastern (ACC) and Western (PAC) left-behind midmajor conferences.

(05-22-2018 09:43 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-18-2018 09:40 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  Pac-16 East:
-Texas
-Oklahoma
-Colorado
-Utah
-Arizona
-Arizona State
-Texas Tech
-Oklahoma State

The Pac-16 West would’ve been the original Pac-8.

This was the plan in 2010 with Utah replacing A&M. As I recall, the Arizona schools screamed bloody murder about being separated from the California schools.

Funny, a WAC-16 style pod system with 9 conference games instead of 8 would allow all non-California teams to play in California once per year on average.