Throwback about what would have happened if the PAC 16 came about.

“Luck's plan, which also had the support of Louisville athletic Tom Jurich, was also to add UCF for a 12-team Big East divided into two divisions:

West: Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, TCU and Louisville;

East: UConn, Cincinnati, Rutgers, West Virginia, South Florida and UCF.”

"I remember thinking: 'That's not a bad conference,'" Luck said. "And we would have kept the affiliation with the (Big East) basketball schools, because they loved the addition of Kansas. They (the Big 12 schools) also liked it. They were nervous as hell, too. We had a series of phone calls. That was sort of our best option."

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/ucathle.../10325391/

If Louisville/Rutgers leaves I’d assume BYU/Houston for the West and Temple/Memphis for the East.

1 Question: Does that Big East become the 5th access conference or are we just saying P4 instead right now?

P4. There is no football flagship in that remnant conference.

It would still be P4. As previously stated, this league would not have a power program to anchor it - but I feel that it definitely would have gotten more respect/following that the AAC did when it formed in 2014. If/when Louisville/Rutgers inevitably bail, I think they would have been replaced by Houston (West) and Memphis (East). BYU was definitely not coming (since Utah had a recognized power conference membership) and Boise State, IMO, would not have been given special privileges to assure membership. Houston and Memphis would fall within the footprint, and both were clear in 2012/2013 about investing more in their athletics programs. Both would have also brought-in strong recruiting and media markets, which would have been a much better sell as #11 and #12 additions (rather than essentially creating a whole new league based on that premise).

Assuming Notre Dame still leaves for the ACC, the C7 would likely stay for another cycle under this configuration due to the blue blood status of Kansas, and the recent strength of programs like K-State, Baylor and Iowa State. Aligning with UCF and TCU would have been a tough pill to swallow, but it would have been necessary to continue the strength of men's basketball that the Big East had between 2005-2012. I suppose to get to an even twenty schools for non-football, Creighton would have been considered (since they would have been within the footprint of the former Big 12). Similarly, I could see VCU getting a look.

To be sure, for the majority of the programs who would have been in that conference, it was not ideal. But it was making the best of what was dealt to them.

That said, there is something off about this. When this situation was first discussed, Missouri was still part of the Big 12 and had not popped up on the SEC radar yet. One of the teams listed above (TCU or USF) was not a part of that equation. Although its possible the version I am referring to was an even earlier version, as I think it was before Cuse and Pitt left.

(05-30-2019 11:14 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  It would still be P4. As previously stated, this league would not have a power program to anchor it - but I feel that it definitely would have gotten more respect/following that the AAC did when it formed in 2014. If/when Louisville/Rutgers inevitably bail, I think they would have been replaced by Houston (West) and Memphis (East). BYU was definitely not coming (since Utah had a recognized power conference membership) and Boise State, IMO, would not have been given special privileges to assure membership. Houston and Memphis would fall within the footprint, and both were clear in 2012/2013 about investing more in their athletics programs. Both would have also brought-in strong recruiting and media markets, which would have been a much better sell as #11 and #12 additions (rather than essentially creating a whole new league based on that premise).

Assuming Notre Dame still leaves for the ACC, the C7 would likely stay for another cycle under this configuration due to the blue blood status of Kansas, and the recent strength of programs like K-State, Baylor and Iowa State. Aligning with UCF and TCU would have been a tough pill to swallow, but it would have been necessary to continue the strength of men's basketball that the Big East had between 2005-2012. I suppose to get to an even twenty schools for non-football, Creighton would have been considered (since they would have been within the footprint of the former Big 12). Similarly, I could see VCU getting a look.

So.....you’d have a seen:

Houston
Baylor
TCU
Iowa State
Kansas State
Kansas

West Virginia
UConn
Cincy
Memphis
UCF
USF

Might end up like that anyway just under the Big 12 umbrella if the Texahoma exodus happens lol. Not saying it will.

I think you’d see like Temple and BYU added now though.

If, Texas Oklahoma and Kansas all leave the current Big 12, you could have :

South
-----
Baylor
Central Florida
Houston
Kansas State
Oklahoma State
South Florida
Texas Christian
Texas Tech

National
-----
Boise State
BYU
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Iowa State
Memphis
San Diego State
West Virginia

(05-30-2019 02:48 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  If, Texas Oklahoma and Kansas all leave the current Big 12, you could have :

South
-----
Baylor
Central Florida
Houston
Kansas State
Oklahoma State
South Florida
Texas Christian
Texas Tech

National
-----
Boise State
BYU
Cincinnati
Connecticut
Iowa State
Memphis
San Diego State
West Virginia

Texas Oklahoma and Kansas would leave with one more, in all likelihood either Texas Tech or Oklahoma State.

The best option for the remaining Big 12 members would likely be to cherry pick the best of the AAC, MWC and BYU. Possibly something like you suggest:

West
-----
Texas Christian
Baylor
Texas Tech/Oklahoma State
New Mexico
BYU
Boise State
San Diego State
UNLV

East
-----
West Virginia
Kansas State
Iowa St.
Houston
Memphis
Cincinnati
USF
UCF

I don't see the C7 going along with this. Also, the Big 12 is a tweener at best here, definitely not a full-fledged power conference.

(11-22-2017 11:52 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Here's a possible alternate timeline for a Pac-16 scenario:

2011
Colorado from Big 12 to Pac-12
Nebraska from Big 12 to Big Ten
Utah from MWC to Pac-12

2012
Central Florida from C-USA to Big 12
Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Rutgers, South Florida, West Virginia from Big East to Big 12
Missouri, Texas A&M from Big 12 to SEC
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech from Big 12 to Pac-16
Pittsburgh, Syracuse from Big East to ACC
TCU from MWC to Big 12

Big 12
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Rutgers, South Florida, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Louisville, TCU

2013
Butler (NFB), Xavier (NFB) from A-10 to Big East
Creighton (NFB) from MVC to Big East
Notre Dame (NFB) from Big East to ACC

2014
Houston from C-USA to Big 12
Louisville from Big 12 to ACC
Maryland from ACC to Big Ten
Navy (FB) from FBS Ind to Big 12
Rutgers from Big 12 to Big Ten

~~~~~~

FBS 2018

Same as in our timeline: ACC, Big Ten, SEC, MWC

Pac-16
East Pod: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
North Pod: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South Pod: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West Pod: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC
(pods alternate biennially between Northeast/Southwest and Northwest/Southeast Divisions)

Big 12
East: Central Florida, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Iowa State, South Florida, West Virginia
West: Baylor, Houston, Kansas, Kansas State, Navy* (Patriot), TCU

C-USA
East: Charlotte, East Carolina, FIU, Marshall, Memphis, Southern Miss, UAB
West: Louisiana Tech, Rice, SMU, Tulane, Tulsa, UTEP, UTSA

MAC
East: Akron, Buffalo, Kent State, Massachusetts* (A-10), Miami-OH, Ohio, Temple* (A-10)
West: Ball State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Northern Illinois, Toledo, Western Michigan

Sun Belt
East: FAU, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee, South Alabama, Troy, Western Kentucky
West: Arkansas State, Louisiana-Lafayette, Louisiana-Monroe, New Mexico State* (WAC), North Texas, Texas State
Non-FB: Little Rock

FBS Ind
Army* (Patriot), BYU* (WCC), Liberty* (ASUN), Notre Dame* (ACC)

* = football only (primary conference)

This had to be from the brief window after A&M and Mizzou announced they were leaving the B12 and Cuse and Pitt announced they were leaving the BE but before the Big Ten added Rutgers and Maryland.

There was an earlier version of this where the BE eyed potential orphans Baylor, ISU, K St, Kansas, and Missouri. They would have needed a 14th, likely TCU:

West: Bay, TCU, K St, Kansas, ISU, Mizzou, L'ville
East: Cincy, WVU, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, UConn, USF
Non-fb: Catholic 7 & ND

(05-30-2019 11:44 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  To be sure, for the majority of the programs who would have been in that conference, it was not ideal. But it was making the best of what was dealt to them.

That said, there is something off about this. When this situation was first discussed, Missouri was still part of the Big 12 and had not popped up on the SEC radar yet. One of the teams listed above (TCU or USF) was not a part of that equation. Although its possible the version I am referring to was an even earlier version, as I think it was before Cuse and Pitt left.

This is correct. Big East/Big 12 merger was before Mizzou took off to the SEC. Mizzou and A&M took off after the PAC-16 stuff had been shut down.

https://nypost.com/2011/09/05/big-east-c...-missouri/

(05-30-2019 08:50 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  https://nypost.com/2011/09/05/big-east-c...-missouri/

Those were wild times indeed.

Why is everyone so certain Louisville would still be the choice to replace Maryland in the ACC? If WVU is available they get the nod. WVU and Louisville have comparable academics, WVU has the better FB pedigree and established rivalries with many already in the league.

(05-30-2019 09:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Why is everyone so certain Louisville would still be the choice to replace Maryland in the ACC? If WVU is available they get the nod. WVU and Louisville have comparable academics, WVU has the better FB pedigree and established rivalries with many already in the league.

If the ACC wanted West Virginia, don't you think they would have taken them earlier, when they were available? Like before Pitt or Syracuse? Or even before BC?

I remember it going something like this.
Nebraska to B10


Texas, Texas tech, Oklahoma, Okst, A&M and Colorado were reportedly going to the p10.

If this happened Kansas KState and Missouri were going to go the BE. Bringing the BE to 20 . Syracuse Pitt and WVU were still around, Talk that Iowa st could replace Missouri that was interested in the B10 or SEC


Baylor was on the outs


Pressure was allegedly put on Texas to include Baylor, thus replacing Colorado


Colorado goes to P10 without waiting for the group

A&M to SEC


B12 stays together

Utah to P10


Pitt and Syracuse announce move to ACC

Missouri to SEC
ND to ACC

B12 down to 8
TCU to B12
Louisville rumored to be 1oth school but doesn't want to leave the BE without giving proper notice. B12 needs someone right away

WVU agrees to join B12

Rutgers and UMD to b10

Louisville to ACC

This might help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sc...ealignment

To the OP, I think yes the conference would have retained power status. Every school in the list, except TCU and UCF, was a power conference member at the time. Further ESPN had already approved TCU, who had a few times finished in the top 10 the last decade, as a member of the elite group. There is no way the "in" power group would cut free 10 (or 11) current members of their exclusive club. This is especially true, since the list includes 3 (and probably 4 initially, as Missouri took some time to join the SEC) flagships in KU, UConn and West Virginia.

I think it's very speculative how things would have played out. Simultaneously with Texas deciding to reject the deal, the P10 Presidents were changing their mind on the mix and wanting to swap KU for Oklahoma State - although swapping those two really doesn't change things materially. (I think it just shows how unstable the whole mixture was, especially with Texas A&M still wanting to join the SEC, something the really wanted to do instead of being forced into the B12 formation.) But let's say the P10 stayed the course, didn't try to reset the group, and Texas A&M only broke off for the SEC. Utah still gets pulled for the 16th member as a replacement for A&M now, Nebraska still joins the B1G, and Missouri still follows A&M into the SEC.

The question is the next round. From the B1G perspective, Maryland and Rutgers still fulfill that Mid-Atlantic recruiting zone need to stay competitive with the SEC and ACC on a talent level, as well as NYC and DC media market access, critical to their BTN huge money haul -- those strong demographics are why the B1G makes more money than the SEC (which has more talented players).

But this is where things change. West Virginia rated the higher value product than Louisville to ESPN when the B12 was looking for a school to replace Missouri, and that would still have been the case when the ACC went looking for a school. So it would have been West Virginia in the ACC and not Louisville.

So what would this Big East have done, now reduced to 10? I think ESPN (I assume CBS would have switched to the P16 since it has Texas, Oklahoma) would have told them the same thing they told the B12, that adding schools from the G5 list would not get them any additional money. They would have been told to stay at 10. BYU Football only might have been considered, but that seems unlikely. Memphis would have been rejected by the flagships as well as the other schools from the B12, on academic grounds (they did not get a B12 rose, nothing has changed on the academic front). Houston would no longer have Texas legislature putting pressure on Texas to be included, as Texas would not be in the conference. Both Temple and Houston are just a little too meh. So I think they would stand at 10.

The C7 question remains, as does ND affiliation. Would having KU and Louisville be enough to stay in? Or would they still have followed their recruiting needs and preference to play with Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Miami and of course the Duke, Virginia, UNC trio have still pulled them into the ACC? Hard to say, but probably Football need and recruiting needs (same thing that drove B1G expansion) would still have pulled them into the ACC. For the C7 the same question remains. And would they have gotten enough money from this better Big East? I think had they stayed the conference might have probably looked to add Creighton as an 18th in Basketball. But having Cincy, their would have been no need for Xavier, and Butler was the 10th (20th in this case), so no need either.

Conference USA would look very different. Memphis, Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, ECU would still be members, along with UTEP, USM and UAB. I am not even sure who'd they would have had beyond that. The MAC would probably still have UMass and Temple as Football only members. Perhaps those would have been C-USA targets.

Very different universe.

(05-30-2019 10:02 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(05-30-2019 09:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Why is everyone so certain Louisville would still be the choice to replace Maryland in the ACC? If WVU is available they get the nod. WVU and Louisville have comparable academics, WVU has the better FB pedigree and established rivalries with many already in the league.

If the ACC wanted West Virginia, don't you think they would have taken them earlier, when they were available? Like before Pitt or Syracuse? Or even before BC?

The ACC thought West Virginia and Rutgers were not going anywhere and would be waiting. They didn’t see the Big XII and Big Ten getting those two otherwise you’d probably have WVU or Rutgers in the ACC instead of Louisville.

(05-30-2019 10:02 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(05-30-2019 09:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Why is everyone so certain Louisville would still be the choice to replace Maryland in the ACC? If WVU is available they get the nod. WVU and Louisville have comparable academics, WVU has the better FB pedigree and established rivalries with many already in the league.

If the ACC wanted West Virginia, don't you think they would have taken them earlier, when they were available? Like before Pitt or Syracuse? Or even before BC?

Long time acc fans can retell this better than I, but WVU carried a lot of bad blood from a previous era that made them, at least then, almost a non-starter.

(05-30-2019 10:02 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(05-30-2019 09:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Why is everyone so certain Louisville would still be the choice to replace Maryland in the ACC? If WVU is available they get the nod. WVU and Louisville have comparable academics, WVU has the better FB pedigree and established rivalries with many already in the league.

If the ACC wanted West Virginia, don't you think they would have taken them earlier, when they were available? Like before Pitt or Syracuse? Or even before BC?

I'm talking about WVU and Louisville. Your logic makes no sense. If they really wanted Pitt why didn;t they take them before Miami? Or VT? Or even BC?