(09-29-2018 08:08 AM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  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.

The split was inevitable, it was just a matter of time.

The C7, even if presented an offer to invite an 8th member, had leverage to depart because they aimed to create a basketball-first conference. Their departure was not so much about Tulane being invited as much as it was their desire to be - once again - in a league that prioritized basketball, without the baggage of football. In this scenario, UCF, Houston and SMU are all full members. These programs, at this point in time - 2012, only had a combined seven NCAA Tournament appearances in the prior twenty years. If you toss in USF, which is another football-first school, the league would still be looking at 25% of its membership not only lacking success in basketball, but also pushing the footprint of NYC further away (and creating a Southern-based league).

After the departure of Syracuse and Pittsburgh, there were simply no schools available that would have kept the league's identity and value up. When West Virginia soon left, the split was a foregone conclusion. Notre Dame leaving for the ACC expedited the C7's plans of sticking around for a year before they left.

(09-29-2018 01:56 AM)JRsec Wrote:  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

Lots of interesting stuff to dissect here:

If the SEC takes Florida St early I think that incentivized the ACC to not only pursue expansion northward with schools like Penn St but I also think it means that they grab Miami. I think Miami goes along with the arrangement but I don't know that Penn St does. It's not exactly the type of conference the Nitany Lions wanted--not under Tobacco Road domination.

If Arkansas was looking to get out of the SWC sooner and he SEC was willing to take them on wouldn't you say that the SWC ends up toppling a few years sooner with with the SEC, Big 8, and Pac 10 all expressing interest in poaching their membership?

If Texas and A&M agree that the SEC is where to go I think that's where they end up.

If the Big Ten lures a pair of Big 8 schools and the Pac 10 comes after Colorado you probably still end up with a full/partial merger of SWC and Big 8 elements.

The East is a bit of a puzzle. If Penn St is still there and there's a hope of a conference forming I think that's where they stay.

(09-29-2018 11:03 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 08:08 AM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  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.

The split was inevitable, it was just a matter of time.

The C7, even if presented an offer to invite an 8th member, had leverage to depart because they aimed to create a basketball-first conference. Their departure was not so much about Tulane being invited as much as it was their desire to be - once again - in a league that prioritized basketball, without the baggage of football. In this scenario, UCF, Houston and SMU are all full members. These programs, at this point in time - 2012, only had a combined seven NCAA Tournament appearances in the prior twenty years. If you toss in USF, which is another football-first school, the league would still be looking at 25% of its membership not only lacking success in basketball, but also pushing the footprint of NYC further away (and creating a Southern-based league).

After the departure of Syracuse and Pittsburgh, there were simply no schools available that would have kept the league's identity and value up. When West Virginia soon left, the split was a foregone conclusion. Notre Dame leaving for the ACC expedited the C7's plans of sticking around for a year before they left.

There was a plan on the table for the Big East to have a football and a non football Divison and in basketball the division's would play double round robin within the division, and just a few crossover games and then play a shared conference tournament. This was the plan to let the basketball side retain their RPI and tradition.

I think they might have worked something out.

(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.

I would rather entertain the thought of the 2010 Big East membership, knowing about the ten-team conference championship game requirement, would simply add Memphis as a full-member and ECU as a football-only member. The league could then have added Butler as a non-football member to have a nice 18-team basketball league and a 10-team football conference that could have staged a championship game.

Big East Football
Cincinnati
UConn
ECU
Louisville
Memphis
Pittsburgh
Rutgers
Syracuse
West Virginia
USF

Big East Basketball
Butler
Cincinnati
UConn
DePaul
Georgetown
Louisville
Marquette
Memphis
Notre Dame
Pittsburgh
Providence
Rutgers
Seton Hall
St. Johns
Syracuse
Villanova
West Virginia
USF

(09-29-2018 11:08 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 11:03 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 08:08 AM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  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.

The split was inevitable, it was just a matter of time.

The C7, even if presented an offer to invite an 8th member, had leverage to depart because they aimed to create a basketball-first conference. Their departure was not so much about Tulane being invited as much as it was their desire to be - once again - in a league that prioritized basketball, without the baggage of football. In this scenario, UCF, Houston and SMU are all full members. These programs, at this point in time - 2012, only had a combined seven NCAA Tournament appearances in the prior twenty years. If you toss in USF, which is another football-first school, the league would still be looking at 25% of its membership not only lacking success in basketball, but also pushing the footprint of NYC further away (and creating a Southern-based league).

After the departure of Syracuse and Pittsburgh, there were simply no schools available that would have kept the league's identity and value up. When West Virginia soon left, the split was a foregone conclusion. Notre Dame leaving for the ACC expedited the C7's plans of sticking around for a year before they left.

There was a plan on the table for the Big East to have a football and a non football Divison and in basketball the division's would play double round robin within the division, and just a few crossover games and then play a shared conference tournament. This was the plan to let the basketball side retain their RPI and tradition.

I think they might have worked something out.

If you're already going to play double-round-robin in your division, which would essentially be the current Big East minus X and Creighton, then what's the point? To play UConn once every two or three years? They can just schedule them out of conference and keep teams they aren't interested in off the schedule.

This all ignoring the larger point though - once Fox was willing to shell out $5 million per year per team for the basketball side the hybrid conference was done, full stop. The football teams would never have been able to find a media deal paying them $15-20 million each per season to keep the basketball teams whole after the football/non-football percentage split.

(09-29-2018 11:08 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 11:03 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 08:08 AM)CenterSquarEd Wrote:  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.

The split was inevitable, it was just a matter of time.

The C7, even if presented an offer to invite an 8th member, had leverage to depart because they aimed to create a basketball-first conference. Their departure was not so much about Tulane being invited as much as it was their desire to be - once again - in a league that prioritized basketball, without the baggage of football. In this scenario, UCF, Houston and SMU are all full members. These programs, at this point in time - 2012, only had a combined seven NCAA Tournament appearances in the prior twenty years. If you toss in USF, which is another football-first school, the league would still be looking at 25% of its membership not only lacking success in basketball, but also pushing the footprint of NYC further away (and creating a Southern-based league).

After the departure of Syracuse and Pittsburgh, there were simply no schools available that would have kept the league's identity and value up. When West Virginia soon left, the split was a foregone conclusion. Notre Dame leaving for the ACC expedited the C7's plans of sticking around for a year before they left.

There was a plan on the table for the Big East to have a football and a non football Divison and in basketball the division's would play double round robin within the division, and just a few crossover games and then play a shared conference tournament. This was the plan to let the basketball side retain their RPI and tradition.

I think they might have worked something out.

At that point though, you are essentially creating two leagues within a conference. The Big East would have affirmed the split. The C7 wanted to be in their own league/conference where it had final say over direction of the league and membership. This would not have granted that.

Metro Conference Football didn’t happen for three reasons:
All three involved Louisville and Florida State.

1. As is often mentioned here Louisville did not want to share its basketball money. Mostly because of reason 2.

2. What is often forgotten here is Florida State did not what to share its football revenue that dwarfed any money Louisville made in basketball.

3. Florida State was already getting calls from The SEC and The ACC about joining either of those conferences. Does anyone really think FSU was going to join a new conference of independent programs instead of the well established SEC or ACC.

The Metro Conference failing to put football together led to CUSA being formed a few years later. It cost Louisville its football coach but Bill Olsen saw the end of independent football and didn’t want to see UofL left out.

Remember college football of the late 80’s and early 90’s was a different landscape. Louisville was lucky to have a program in 1990. In 1983 the university held meetings with discussions to end our program and follow Xavier’s example.

Louisville was fortunate Bill Olsen and the BOT decided to save football.
No telling where UofL would be without football. Probably The Big East or maybe The MVC.
CJ

Here is the often linked Metro article

https://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jour...rence.aspx

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

Since you're not alone in this, it's worth reminding folks that the Pac-12 is NEVER (and I can't stress that word enough) going to align with a religious school. So all of the Baylor and/or BYU scenarios that are ever raised is not going to happen. None of the California or Oregon schools will ever go for that, and the way the Mormon church inserted themselves into the Proposition 8 campaign a few years ago pretty well cemented it. In fact, when Texas politicians tried to twist arms to have Baylor included in the original scenarios (excluding Colorado), the Pac-10 nipped that in the bud by inviting Colorado immediately. Once the rest of the Pac-16 died, then they invited Utah.

USFFan

(09-29-2018 09:05 AM)Poster Wrote:  

(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.

Kind of hard to say, given that all that has transpired since then didn't happen in a vacuum. There once was a time when both East Carolina and Southern Miss were really good football schools. In fact, there was a while when Southern Miss was likely the best team in that state. Their current situations are in many ways tied to the fact that they were left behind in the conference landscape, much the way that SMU and Rice were abandoned by the SWC.

USFFan

(09-28-2018 11:58 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Biggest blunder EVER: WVU and VT voting for a bowl ban for the old Southern Conference, thus causing the ACC to spin off and leave those schools out (though VT eventually got in, WVU is still out).

Did this happen in 1940's or 1950's?

1951 [LINK]. Maryland and Clemson defied the rule in 1952 and were punished by the conference - which lead to teams splitting off to form the ACC, which began playing in the Fall of 1953.

In 2011, when Big East invited TCU for a 17/9 BB/FB split, they could have also invited Utah, BYU and Boise St, giving you a 20/12 split.
For basketball, you run it as 2 separate 10-team entities.
If the 8 basketball-only schools leave and keep the Big East name, you still have a really strong 12 team football conference, with lots of quality teams to call up if any members defect.

(09-29-2018 01:43 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  In 2011, when Big East invited TCU for a 17/9 BB/FB split, they could have also invited Utah, BYU and Boise St, giving you a 20/12 split.
For basketball, you run it as 2 separate 10-team entities.
If the 8 basketball-only schools leave and keep the Big East name, you still have a really strong 12 team football conference, with lots of quality teams to call up if any members defect.

Utah had already taken a PAC invite a few months before then. Boise and BYU were probably seen as too far away.

(09-29-2018 09:48 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(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.

One school of thought was that adding 2 schools that were in C-USA at the beginning of this millenium (especially Cincy, which averaged 28,434 in attendance last year, lower than every power conference team except Duke and Kansas) actually would have made Texas and OU more likely to leave.

And the TV networks aren't willing to pay the Big 12 a single extra cent if they expand. That means that adding 2 more programs (unless perhaps they pull off something absurd like an Alabama/Ohio State combo) will reduce each school's share by 20%.

Plus the NCAA is willing to let them have a title game with 10 teams.

(09-29-2018 01:19 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 11:58 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Biggest blunder EVER: WVU and VT voting for a bowl ban for the old Southern Conference, thus causing the ACC to spin off and leave those schools out (though VT eventually got in, WVU is still out).

Did this happen in 1940's or 1950's?

1951 [LINK]. Maryland and Clemson defied the rule in 1952 and were punished by the conference - which lead to teams splitting off to form the ACC, which began playing in the Fall of 1953.

Thanks for this great tidbit. This would have made the founding members of the ACC:

Maryland
WVU
VT
UVA
UNC
Duke
WF
NC St
Clemson
South Carolina

Let's say that the presence of WVU and VT helps to temper the drama that sent the Gamecocks into independence.

GT get added to make 11. Then in the early 90s you have both the SEC and ACC looking to go 12. Florida St allegedly chose the ACC over the SEC due to an easier route to a national championship so let's say in 91 they still join the ACC.

Then you have to wonder what becomes of Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Rutgers, Temple, and most importantly, Miami. If Florida St passes on the SEC then maybe it's Miami that joins to balance the Arkansas add. Those other 5 are stuck in independence land or have to form a Big East football conference with either Army and Navy or the C-USA founders. Regardless, I don't think this league is a Bowl Alliance participant.

The only alternative for those 5 is to hope either the Big Ten or ACC is willing to go larger.

Long story short, had VT and WVU not ticked off Maryland and Clemson they have much brighter futures.

(09-29-2018 04:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 01:19 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 11:58 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Biggest blunder EVER: WVU and VT voting for a bowl ban for the old Southern Conference, thus causing the ACC to spin off and leave those schools out (though VT eventually got in, WVU is still out).

Did this happen in 1940's or 1950's?

1951 [LINK]. Maryland and Clemson defied the rule in 1952 and were punished by the conference - which lead to teams splitting off to form the ACC, which began playing in the Fall of 1953.

Thanks for this great tidbit. This would have made the founding members of the ACC:

Maryland
WVU
VT
UVA
UNC
Duke
WF
NC St
Clemson
South Carolina

Let's say that the presence of WVU and VT helps to temper the drama that sent the Gamecocks into independence.

GT get added to make 11. Then in the early 90s you have both the SEC and ACC looking to go 12. Florida St allegedly chose the ACC over the SEC due to an easier route to a national championship so let's say in 91 they still join the ACC.

Then you have to wonder what becomes of Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Rutgers, Temple, and most importantly, Miami. If Florida St passes on the SEC then maybe it's Miami that joins to balance the Arkansas add. Those other 5 are stuck in independence land or have to form a Big East football conference with either Army and Navy or the C-USA founders. Regardless, I don't think this league is a Bowl Alliance participant.

The only alternative for those 5 is to hope either the Big Ten or ACC is willing to go larger.

Long story short, had VT and WVU not ticked off Maryland and Clemson they have much brighter futures.

Only Furman, VMI and The Citadel are the only teams left from this group that time period.

(09-29-2018 04:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 04:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 01:19 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 11:58 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 02:37 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  Biggest blunder EVER: WVU and VT voting for a bowl ban for the old Southern Conference, thus causing the ACC to spin off and leave those schools out (though VT eventually got in, WVU is still out).

Did this happen in 1940's or 1950's?

1951 [LINK]. Maryland and Clemson defied the rule in 1952 and were punished by the conference - which lead to teams splitting off to form the ACC, which began playing in the Fall of 1953.

Thanks for this great tidbit. This would have made the founding members of the ACC:

Maryland
WVU
VT
UVA
UNC
Duke
WF
NC St
Clemson
South Carolina

Let's say that the presence of WVU and VT helps to temper the drama that sent the Gamecocks into independence.

GT get added to make 11. Then in the early 90s you have both the SEC and ACC looking to go 12. Florida St allegedly chose the ACC over the SEC due to an easier route to a national championship so let's say in 91 they still join the ACC.

Then you have to wonder what becomes of Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Rutgers, Temple, and most importantly, Miami. If Florida St passes on the SEC then maybe it's Miami that joins to balance the Arkansas add. Those other 5 are stuck in independence land or have to form a Big East football conference with either Army and Navy or the C-USA founders. Regardless, I don't think this league is a Bowl Alliance participant.

The only alternative for those 5 is to hope either the Big Ten or ACC is willing to go larger.

Long story short, had VT and WVU not ticked off Maryland and Clemson they have much brighter futures.

Only Furman, VMI and The Citadel are the only teams left from this group that time period.

Surely you of all people would know Washington & Lee, Richmond, and William & Mary were in that league too.

(09-29-2018 04:48 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 04:36 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 04:12 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 01:19 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(09-28-2018 11:58 PM)ArQ Wrote:  Did this happen in 1940's or 1950's?

1951 [LINK]. Maryland and Clemson defied the rule in 1952 and were punished by the conference - which lead to teams splitting off to form the ACC, which began playing in the Fall of 1953.

Thanks for this great tidbit. This would have made the founding members of the ACC:

Maryland
WVU
VT
UVA
UNC
Duke
WF
NC St
Clemson
South Carolina

Let's say that the presence of WVU and VT helps to temper the drama that sent the Gamecocks into independence.

GT get added to make 11. Then in the early 90s you have both the SEC and ACC looking to go 12. Florida St allegedly chose the ACC over the SEC due to an easier route to a national championship so let's say in 91 they still join the ACC.

Then you have to wonder what becomes of Pitt, Syracuse, BC, Rutgers, Temple, and most importantly, Miami. If Florida St passes on the SEC then maybe it's Miami that joins to balance the Arkansas add. Those other 5 are stuck in independence land or have to form a Big East football conference with either Army and Navy or the C-USA founders. Regardless, I don't think this league is a Bowl Alliance participant.

The only alternative for those 5 is to hope either the Big Ten or ACC is willing to go larger.

Long story short, had VT and WVU not ticked off Maryland and Clemson they have much brighter futures.

Only Furman, VMI and The Citadel are the only teams left from this group that time period.

Surely you of all people would know Washington & Lee, Richmond, and William & Mary were in that league too.

Yes, but they left the conference. The Southern Conference had a major shakeup, and still going.

(09-29-2018 02:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 01:43 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  In 2011, when Big East invited TCU for a 17/9 BB/FB split, they could have also invited Utah, BYU and Boise St, giving you a 20/12 split.
For basketball, you run it as 2 separate 10-team entities.
If the 8 basketball-only schools leave and keep the Big East name, you still have a really strong 12 team football conference, with lots of quality teams to call up if any members defect.

Utah had already taken a PAC invite a few months before then. Boise and BYU were probably seen as too far away.

Utah has not yet been invited to PAC. That would not happen for a while afterward. I remember bc when I brought it up on a Big East board at that time, it was dismissed as a bad idea LOL.

(09-29-2018 08:59 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 02:16 PM)Poster Wrote:  

(09-29-2018 01:43 PM)Hashtag Wrote:  In 2011, when Big East invited TCU for a 17/9 BB/FB split, they could have also invited Utah, BYU and Boise St, giving you a 20/12 split.
For basketball, you run it as 2 separate 10-team entities.
If the 8 basketball-only schools leave and keep the Big East name, you still have a really strong 12 team football conference, with lots of quality teams to call up if any members defect.

Utah had already taken a PAC invite a few months before then. Boise and BYU were probably seen as too far away.

Utah has not yet been invited to PAC. That would not happen for a while afterward. I remember bc when I brought it up on a Big East board at that time, it was dismissed as a bad idea LOL.

Utah announced it would be joining the Pac in 2011 on June 17, 2010. TCU announced it would be joining the Big East in 2012 on November 29, 2010. I suppose the Big East could have invited TCU months before the announcement, but it seems unlikely.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sc...ealignment