Had the SEC added the Seminoles during either of Bowden's overtures in the 80's, then I think the realignment ends very differently. Arkansas definitely wanted in at at that time. With Florida State and Arkansas in hand to move to 12 then the pressure would only have built for the football first schools of the ACC.

With Florida State off of the table by the late 80's might the ACC have taken a much more serious aim at trying to lure Penn State? Would the Big East have had a much better hand to have poached the ACC? Without the hugely successful 80's version of the Noles to attract football first schools from the Old Big East. I think the big play then is for Penn State. I think the Big East realizes that Penn State won't be out there long and maybe they make them an offer of membership realizing that the SEC has moved to enhance football. That would have helped the Big East hang onto Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Boston College, and Syracuse at least temporarily.

With basketball revenue beginning to sag and the push on for football programs the pathway to riches being sold to conference commissioners and school presidents everywhere was expansion for football. It would likely have changed the dynamic of all future moves.

If the Big East snags Penn State early, the Big 10's main target area would have been down the Chisolm trail through the Big 8. I think the Big 10 would have taken Nebraska and Missouri in 1990. By 1990 Oklahoma was already quietly listening to the SEC and PAC. With the fate of the SWC on shaky ground and with key members of the Big 8 being recruited away as both the Big 8 and SWC presidents realized the deficits of their footprints in a new emerging pay model, and with Texas's desire to chart it's own course, I could see an itchy Kansas with the departure of Nebraska and Missouri to the Big 10 bolting with Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, to the PAC. OSU wasn't the tag along concern in 90 that they would become by 2010.

The PAC in one move would have jumped first and jumped to 14, but looking at the WAC model and having read the super conference plan that was popular at that time they would look around for two more.

The SEC would have probably landed Texas A&M early since talks began in the 89-90 time frame. If Clemson had left the ACC to make it 14 that would have opened the door for other possible ACC schools to follow. And in 91-2 Clemson was already quietly shopping around with F.S.U. so they are likely here I believe if the SEC moves early on F.S.U..

Clemson's departure would create the likelihood for Virginia and Maryland to decide for the Big 10 over the Big East. Then the Big 10 would have gone after newly committed Penn State and Syracuse which at that time was still AAU. That takes them to 16.

Duke and North Carolina would have headed to the SEC to round it out at 16 because at the time that would have been their lean, as later when Maryland departed they called us first just in case the worst happened.

**************************************************
So the PAC might have wound up looking like this:

Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

California, U.C.L.A., U.S.C., Stanford

Arizona, Arizona State, (Brigham Young/Utah, Colorado)

Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech

Needing 2 more they would have picked up Colorado and since we are talking 1990 before the rise of intense PC they might have worked something out with B.Y.U. instead of Utah.
*******************************************************
The Big 10 would have looked significantly different:

Maryland, Penn State, Syracuse, Virginia

Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue

Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, Ohio State
********************************************
And the SEC would have been this:

Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee

Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia

Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Vanderbilt

Arkansas, L.S.U., Mississippi, Texas A&M

The Big East would have survived but it might have looked quite differently for football:

Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina

Boston College, Connecticut, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

Cincinnati, Iowa State, Louisville, Virginia Tech

Baylor/Houston, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, T.C.U.


And I am sure N.D. would have kept their partial deal with the Big East

(09-27-2018 07:47 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's debate the biggest realignment blunders. Let's keep it to FBS DI. I'm sure sure someone here thinks the break up of the WVIAC was devestating but let's keep the discussion to widely known entities.— For DavidSt. Please read!!!

Here are a few to ponder


Pac 16 DOA

C-USA 3.0 (current 14 member set up)

Big 12/LHN Drama sending Mizzou to the SEC

I wanted to talk about the PAC 16 DOA. At the time when Texas & the Pac 10 had brokered the deal, here was what was supposed to go down: Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech or Baylor (can’t remember which one)were all supposed to join the Pac 10, making it the PAC 16. TAMU’s president was originally on board with this arrangement. However, TAMU’s regents were not and vehemently opposed the move. They felt like TAMU belonged in either the Big XII or the SEC, and they let the TAMU president know this in no uncertain terms. With TAMU now off the table, the deal fell apart, except for Colorado who did leave for the PAC 10, now PAC 12 and the Big XII found new life. Larry Scott should have reassured Texas & OU that he would still take them & OSU as well as TTU, but he did not, and the less said about the intelligence of the PAC 12 presidents, the better.

As for C-USA, they did get some good acquisitions (WKU, UNT, ODU, & Charlotte, as well as MT), but where C-USA messed up was in taking both of the south Florida schools, because of something the AAC is guilty of also: markets!!!

(09-28-2018 10:20 AM)whittx Wrote:  Grew up outside of Ithaca and am a SUNY Brockport grad. I can understand how Binghamton could have been held up, since it didn't even exist until the late 40's, but the other three (especially Buffalo) never made sense. I am old enough to remember Syracuse having to go on the road for two years to play games since the Dome was built on their old stadium site. Granted that back then, schools like Cornell could draw 15,000 a game at home. Now that there is so much football on TV and the demographics of the Ivy League and Patriot League schools have changed so much, they are lucky to get 5,000 folks there.

I thought it was only one football season of home games that they lost to construction?

After football season in Fall/Winter of 1978, they began demolition of Archibald, and when the snow came to an end in the Spring of 1979, they broke ground on construction of the Dome, which opened in for football in the fall of 1980.

(09-29-2018 03:40 AM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:20 AM)whittx Wrote:  Grew up outside of Ithaca and am a SUNY Brockport grad. I can understand how Binghamton could have been held up, since it didn't even exist until the late 40's, but the other three (especially Buffalo) never made sense. I am old enough to remember Syracuse having to go on the road for two years to play games since the Dome was built on their old stadium site. Granted that back then, schools like Cornell could draw 15,000 a game at home. Now that there is so much football on TV and the demographics of the Ivy League and Patriot League schools have changed so much, they are lucky to get 5,000 folks there.

I thought it was only one football season of home games that they lost to construction?

After football season in Fall/Winter of 1978, they began demolition of Archibald, and when the snow came to an end in the Spring of 1979, they broke ground on construction of the Dome, which opened in for football in the fall of 1980.

That is correct. Cuse upset a Top 25 Navy team on a wonderful, warm mid November day to close out Archbold Stadium in 1978. They played all their games on the road in 1979. Their home games in 1979 were at Meadowlands (NJ), Rich Stadium (Buffalo) and Schoellkopf Field (Cornell). The stadium opened on Sept 20th, 1980 against Miami-OH.

(09-29-2018 03:34 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 07:47 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's debate the biggest realignment blunders. Let's keep it to FBS DI. I'm sure sure someone here thinks the break up of the WVIAC was devestating but let's keep the discussion to widely known entities.— For DavidSt. Please read!!!

Here are a few to ponder


Pac 16 DOA

C-USA 3.0 (current 14 member set up)

Big 12/LHN Drama sending Mizzou to the SEC

I wanted to talk about the PAC 16 DOA. At the time when Texas & the Pac 10 had brokered the deal, here was what was supposed to go down: Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech or Baylor (can’t remember which one)were all supposed to join the Pac 10, making it the PAC 16. TAMU’s president was originally on board with this arrangement. However, TAMU’s regents were not and vehemently opposed the move. They felt like TAMU belonged in either the Big XII or the SEC, and they let the TAMU president know this in no uncertain terms. With TAMU now off the table, the deal fell apart, except for Colorado who did leave for the PAC 10, now PAC 12 and the Big XII found new life. Larry Scott should have reassured Texas & OU that he would still take them & OSU as well as TTU, but he did not, and the less said about the intelligence of the PAC 12 presidents, the better.

As for C-USA, they did get some good acquisitions (WKU, UNT, ODU, & Charlotte, as well as MT), but where C-USA messed up was in taking both of the south Florida schools, because of something the AAC is guilty of also: markets!!!

Look. You do not like what I posted, but what I posted are known facts that the schools I listed were part of the FBS type of schools. University of Chicago, Sewanee, Drake, Grinnell and some others have been FBS P5 schools at one time. Some others were members of the G5 at one time. Big West, WAC, MVC and Southern Conferences all were 1A conferences at one time. So, my posts fall under the OP's guidelines.

Lamar blunder for leaving the SBC.

In hindsight, the Big East/American breakup was preventable. The turning point was when Rutgers was the last football program off the boat. Aresco invited East Carolina as a football-only member, which was a good move, and Tulane as an all-sports member, which was an unforced error. What if he had given the Catholic 7 a new 8th non-football member (to replace the previously departed Notre Dame) by inviting Butler? They would have had a 10-member football and 16-member basketball configuration with all-sports members UConn, Temple, UCF, USF, Cincy, Memphis, Houston, and SMU; the Catholic 7 and Butler as non-football members; and football-only members Navy and East Carolina.

(09-28-2018 10:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:05 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Yeah, Florida St to the ACC was not a blunder. It worked out great for both sides. The benefits to Florida St were obvious. The benefits to the ACC were not so obvious unless you look at history.

Before Florida St, the ACC had only placed 2 teams in "New Years" Bowl games from 1961 to 1989.

Maryland '76 Cotton
Clemson '81 Orange

The ACC was a "basketball" conference with no football cache whatsoever outside of the small niche Clemson had carved out for itself. The invitation of Florida St in Sept 1990 put the ACC on the football map, and eventually elevated the programs at the other schools.

And just in time for the creation of the BCS a few years later . . .

Before Florida St., the ACC was a WAC level football conference. It was somewhat embarrassing to lose to an ACC team. Clemson, while their team wasn't a fluke, was still viewed almost as much a fluke as BYU winning an MNC in the 80s.

Don't really agree with that...the ACC had moments of great football teams back in the early years but also some schools suffered under high admission standards. I wouldn't call them like the WAC. It was a step below the top conferences but they still had some top teams.

Very interesting scenario, JR! But what of Rutgers? Wouldn't they still be with the Big East if they weren't poached by the Big Ten?

How is the mid-2000s ACC expansion or the Big 12 not adding Louisville and Cincy on the same level as the other things the OP mentioned?

(09-28-2018 11:57 AM)usffan Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 11:31 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Louisville says no thanks to Great Metro. Once Louisville backed out the deal wasn't coming together thus leading to the Big East stepping in to provide a football home for their members and eventually leaving Louisville on the wrong side of AQ/non-AQ for a number of years. Led to the formation of the Great Midwest, led to the Sun Belt / American South merger, eventually leading to CUSA.

16 team Great Metro wasn't going to happen but a 14 team version heading off Big East football might very well have happened.

Then you have to wonder if the Big East not having the pressure to add football affiliates as full members might have been not only more stable but such a high achiever in hoops that the league would have been better positioned for survival without the drama.

Was just about to post this as well. In hindsight, this worked out well for some of the schools (Va. Tech, Louisville, FSU) and definitely NOT for others (Southern Miss, e.g.).

http://www.forgotten5.com/2017/08/28/the...never-was/

USFFan

I have my doubts about Miami and FSU being happy in the Metro South Division. Seriously it's almost C-USA plus Miami and Florida State.

(09-27-2018 09:08 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Ths Bigd East/American adding Tulane and Tulsa and then picking a name that sounds just like C-USA. I still wish we could send those back and add Marshall and Army.

I'm going to strongly agree with you here but part of the problem was the conference title game. If they knew that in a couple of short years that they would only need 10 FB teams to host a title game then the conference might look like this:

UConn, Temple, Cincy, Memphis, USF, UCF, SMU, Houston

FB only: Navy, ECU

non-FB: Providence, St John's, Seton Hall, Villanova, Georgetown, DePaul, Marquette, Butler

The Catholic 7 stay, they add Butler to balance football and Basketball, life moves on.

WKU and either FAU/MTSU stay in the Sunbelt.

Coastal and one of the other FCS call ups probably don't get invited to the SBC.

(09-29-2018 08:10 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  Before Florida St., the ACC was a WAC level football conference. It was somewhat embarrassing to lose to an ACC team. Clemson, while their team wasn't a fluke, was still viewed almost as much a fluke as BYU winning an MNC in the 80s.

Don't really agree with that...the ACC had moments of great football teams back in the early years but also some schools suffered under high admission standards. I wouldn't call them like the WAC. It was a step below the top conferences but they still had some top teams.

Seven ACC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1961 to 1989:

1976 - Maryland 8th
1978 - Clemson 6th
1980 - North Carolina 10th
1981 - Clemson 1st, UNC 9th
1982 - Clemson 8th
1988 - Clemson 9th


The WAC formed in 1962. Eight WAC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1962 to 1989:

1967 - Wyoming 6th
1970 - Arizona St 6th
1971 - Arizona St 8th
1973 - Arizona St 9th
1975 - Arizona St 2nd
1983 - BYU 7th
1984 - BYU 1st
1985 - Air Force 8th

(09-29-2018 08:56 AM)Poster Wrote:  How is the mid-2000s ACC expansion or the Big 12 not adding Louisville and Cincy on the same level as the other things the OP mentioned?

Adding Cincy and Louisville would have demonstrated that the Big 12 intended to hold together a fully rebuild. Now it's just painfully obvious that Oklahoma and Texas are just sticking around until they get the sweetheart deal that they desire elsewhere.

I kind of wish that Miami, Florida St, and South Carolina would have decided to form their own conference. They could have raided what they could from the ACC (Clemson, possibly others) and filled out the rest with either Metro schools or eastern independent types like WVU or a mix, whatever they needed to get to 8-9 members.

(09-29-2018 03:34 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 07:47 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let's debate the biggest realignment blunders. Let's keep it to FBS DI. I'm sure sure someone here thinks the break up of the WVIAC was devestating but let's keep the discussion to widely known entities.— For DavidSt. Please read!!!

Here are a few to ponder


Pac 16 DOA

C-USA 3.0 (current 14 member set up)

Big 12/LHN Drama sending Mizzou to the SEC

I wanted to talk about the PAC 16 DOA. At the time when Texas & the Pac 10 had brokered the deal, here was what was supposed to go down: Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, and Texas Tech or Baylor (can’t remember which one)were all supposed to join the Pac 10, making it the PAC 16. TAMU’s president was originally on board with this arrangement. However, TAMU’s regents were not and vehemently opposed the move. They felt like TAMU belonged in either the Big XII or the SEC, and they let the TAMU president know this in no uncertain terms. With TAMU now off the table, the deal fell apart, except for Colorado who did leave for the PAC 10, now PAC 12 and the Big XII found new life. Larry Scott should have reassured Texas & OU that he would still take them & OSU as well as TTU, but he did not, and the less said about the intelligence of the PAC 12 presidents, the better.

As for C-USA, they did get some good acquisitions (WKU, UNT, ODU, & Charlotte, as well as MT), but where C-USA messed up was in taking both of the south Florida schools, because of something the AAC is guilty of also: markets!!!

By the time TAMU backed out of the Pac 16 talks I think things must have really devolved. They could have tried to salvage the deal replacing TAMU with Baylor or Kansas and I think they'd still have a pretty great conference. Instead, Texas used the loss of TAMU, Nebraska, and Colorado, all tent poll programs but not the extent as Oklahoma, Texas, and TAMU, and the vulnerability it created for the other remaining programs to leverage for something that no other major conference would have ever granted.

I have to disagree with you on C-USA. I think their rebuild was a blunder of epic proportions. I would have nixed Charlotte and ODU and made them enter FBS through other means. I also would have stayed out of south Florida and instead tightened the footprint and focused on quality football additions. what they ended up with is essentially 2 conferences, each 1-3 members shy of being able to stand in their own right, and due to NCAA regulations and playoff contract money they are all stuck together. I wish they could pull an Airport 5 style split like the one that birthed the MWC.

(09-29-2018 09:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 08:10 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  Before Florida St., the ACC was a WAC level football conference. It was somewhat embarrassing to lose to an ACC team. Clemson, while their team wasn't a fluke, was still viewed almost as much a fluke as BYU winning an MNC in the 80s.

Don't really agree with that...the ACC had moments of great football teams back in the early years but also some schools suffered under high admission standards. I wouldn't call them like the WAC. It was a step below the top conferences but they still had some top teams.

Seven ACC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1961 to 1989:

1976 - Maryland 8th
1978 - Clemson 6th
1980 - North Carolina 10th
1981 - Clemson 1st, UNC 9th
1982 - Clemson 8th
1988 - Clemson 9th


The WAC formed in 1962. Eight WAC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1962 to 1989:

1967 - Wyoming 6th
1970 - Arizona St 6th
1971 - Arizona St 8th
1973 - Arizona St 9th
1975 - Arizona St 2nd
1983 - BYU 7th
1984 - BYU 1st
1985 - Air Force 8th

Interesting. Although the ACC did have 3 national titles (1953, 1981, 1990) to the WAC's 1 (1984) before FSU joined. And everybody knew BYU's 1984 title was a joke. Seriously 34 years later people still talk about that BYU team as being the worst champion ever.

(09-29-2018 08:10 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:05 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Yeah, Florida St to the ACC was not a blunder. It worked out great for both sides. The benefits to Florida St were obvious. The benefits to the ACC were not so obvious unless you look at history.

Before Florida St, the ACC had only placed 2 teams in "New Years" Bowl games from 1961 to 1989.

Maryland '76 Cotton
Clemson '81 Orange

The ACC was a "basketball" conference with no football cache whatsoever outside of the small niche Clemson had carved out for itself. The invitation of Florida St in Sept 1990 put the ACC on the football map, and eventually elevated the programs at the other schools.

And just in time for the creation of the BCS a few years later . . .

Before Florida St., the ACC was a WAC level football conference. It was somewhat embarrassing to lose to an ACC team. Clemson, while their team wasn't a fluke, was still viewed almost as much a fluke as BYU winning an MNC in the 80s.

Don't really agree with that...the ACC had moments of great football teams back in the early years but also some schools suffered under high admission standards. I wouldn't call them like the WAC. It was a step below the top conferences but they still had some top teams.

So did the WAC. The WAC and the ACC were mezzanine for football. The ACC started stepping it up in the 80s, but didn't really get viewed as top tier until after FSU joined.

(09-29-2018 09:43 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-27-2018 09:08 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  Ths Bigd East/American adding Tulane and Tulsa and then picking a name that sounds just like C-USA. I still wish we could send those back and add Marshall and Army.

I'm going to strongly agree with you here but part of the problem was the conference title game. If they knew that in a couple of short years that they would only need 10 FB teams to host a title game then the conference might look like this:

UConn, Temple, Cincy, Memphis, USF, UCF, SMU, Houston

FB only: Navy, ECU

non-FB: Providence, St John's, Seton Hall, Villanova, Georgetown, DePaul, Marquette, Butler

The Catholic 7 stay, they add Butler to balance football and Basketball, life moves on.

WKU and either FAU/MTSU stay in the Sunbelt.

Coastal and one of the other FCS call ups probably don't get invited to the SBC.

If you're thinking of the current rules, there is no minimum number of teams required for a CCG.

17.10.5.2.1 Bowl Subdivision. [FBS] In bowl subdivision football, the maximum number of football contests shall exclude the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 10/28/10, 10/27/11 effective 4/1/12, Adopted: 8/2/12 effective 8/1/14, 1/15/16 effective 8/1/16)
...
(b) Conference Championship Game. One conference championship game:
(1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or
(2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular-season competition among all members of the conference.

(from p. 273 here: http://www.ncaapublications.com/productd...s/D119.pdf)

(09-29-2018 09:44 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 08:10 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:34 AM)bullet Wrote:  Before Florida St., the ACC was a WAC level football conference. It was somewhat embarrassing to lose to an ACC team. Clemson, while their team wasn't a fluke, was still viewed almost as much a fluke as BYU winning an MNC in the 80s.

Don't really agree with that...the ACC had moments of great football teams back in the early years but also some schools suffered under high admission standards. I wouldn't call them like the WAC. It was a step below the top conferences but they still had some top teams.

Seven ACC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1961 to 1989:

1976 - Maryland 8th
1978 - Clemson 6th
1980 - North Carolina 10th
1981 - Clemson 1st, UNC 9th
1982 - Clemson 8th
1988 - Clemson 9th


The WAC formed in 1962. Eight WAC teams finished in the AP Top 10 in football from 1962 to 1989:

1967 - Wyoming 6th
1970 - Arizona St 6th
1971 - Arizona St 8th
1973 - Arizona St 9th
1975 - Arizona St 2nd
1983 - BYU 7th
1984 - BYU 1st
1985 - Air Force 8th

Thanks for the research...I was also thinking of Maryland's great teams in the 1950's (but the WAC wasn't around then). Be interesting to look at the Top 20. And Top 25.

(09-28-2018 11:24 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 10:38 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  MAC blundered for not taken the last 2 old schools that were conference mates with several MAC members. Youngstown State and Northern Michigan both are/were D1 schools..

Northern Michigan in the MAC would’ve been fascinating just for the road trip. FBS football on the UP off Lake Superior?

Northern Michigan has a domed stadium called the Superior Dome, which is virtually a must have for their location. It's a fantastic facility for D2 or whatever NMU is in now.