Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
Author Message
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #61
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-18-2019 12:42 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(11-18-2019 12:23 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  It's easy for us on this board to see the best strategies. The problem is: "best" is defined too much by which group you're in... fans of ths sport want one thing, but fans of a specific conference (like the Big Ten or SEC) want something else (not necessarily what's best for the SPORT), while fans of a specific team might not want something that's not even good for their own conference... then there's what the school administrators want... we are where we are because the players in this game can't agree on how to win.

It is now a market (consumer) driven sport with regards to revenue. Therein lies the priority. The problem is that conferences, AD's, Presidents, and even the players all have different agendas. If all of them would realize that each of them would benefit by doing everything possible to boost the love of the game then all would be rewarded. But power, real or perceived, is never surrendered for the sake of the whole. Power whether with the NCAA (and they are definitely part of the problem with their turf protection, entrenched bureaucracy, money siphoning, and self importance) or the rest I've just mentioned, are not going to act in the best interest until fans turn them off and when that happens they will never fully get back to their lofty position within our culture. Just ask MLB and the NBA how pissing off the fans has worked for them? Even NFL football is beginning to struggle against the backdrop of the Kaepernick issues and the other kneelers.

College football has finally admitted, very belatedly, that they are a business and that admission is coming now in player concessions. They all need to let that sink in because in any business it is the customer to which all should pander. I personally don't like the idea of expanded playoffs, and while fascinated by realignment as a cultural event, would still prefer the 10 team SEC. But if fans want more playoff teams, and networks will acquiesce to fans faster than the other participants in the leadership of college sports, then if we need to consolidate conferences to preserve rivalries and provide a structure that will produce what the fans want, then that is what we should do, but within some constraints.

Whether we move to 4 conferences of 16, 3 conferences of 20 or 24, or two leagues of 32, we need to get there fast, get the committees out of the game, and let the championships be won on the field whether that is 4 teams or 8 teams.

If every year PAC or Big 12 fans become more disinterested due to their champions being left out it will continue to damage the game. Even the current dismay over which 1 loss team will get in turns off the fans. Only the dinosaurs within the NCAA / AD's / Presidents / and Commissioners still believe controversy gets publicity. When everything in life has become contentious it is high time that sports do everything possible not be contentious or controversial. It is a pastime and people use it as an escape from the contentious living of their daily lives. Set up a structure that will yield 4 or 8 schools for a playoff without having a committee decide a damned thing and we'll all be happier for it and it will get us back to discussing the actual games instead of how a committee with arbitrarily enforced standards manage to select the participants. All conversation should be about the players, teams and games, and not about the damned committee!

How to involve everyone?
First divide onto two 32 team divisions:
B1G division: PAC, B1G, plus Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State.
SEC division: SEC, ACC, West Virginia, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU
Notre Dame attaches to one of the conferences and could participate with
stiff restrictions.
It should be easy to divide the 32 team divisions into 4 conferences that are regional and provide traditional rivalries.
I would suggest that 11 of the 12 games in a schedule should be played within your division.

4-8 team conferences per division
conference winners play to get two regional champions
regional champs play to get a division champion
division champions play for the national championship (same number of games currently being played in the playoff system.

Or we could divide into 3 conferences. 10, 11, 11 (10, 10, 12, etc. or in the case of the B1G division it could be 11, 8, 13)
With conference champions and one "wild card" playing to get regional champs. This might even be the best way to incorporate Notre Dame into the mix. They could play in a conference in each of the two divisions in alternating years (to make conferences 11, 11, 11,they could play USC every year and Navy/Stanford every other year).


I like a permanent home for the championship game similar to Omaha for baseball
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2019 08:09 AM by XLance.)
11-19-2019 06:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kaplony Offline
Palmetto State Deplorable

Posts: 25,393
Joined: Apr 2013
I Root For: Newberry
Location: SC
Post: #62
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-13-2019 09:59 PM)XLance Wrote:  So what we would have would be:
Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Nebraska

Florida State, Florida, Georgia, Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vanderbilt
Mississippi, Miss. State, LSU, Arkansas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Texas, Baylor/TCU

Boston College, Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, Maryland, Louisville, Virginia Tech, Miami
UVA, Carolina, Duke, NCSU, Wake Forest, Clemson, South Carolina, Georgia Tech

What's not to like?

Everything in red above.
11-19-2019 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-19-2019 06:10 AM)XLance Wrote:  How to involve everyone?
First divide onto two 32 team divisions:
B1G division: PAC, B1G, plus Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State.
SEC division: SEC, ACC, West Virginia, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU
Notre Dame attaches to one of the conferences and could participate with
stiff restrictions.
It should be easy to divide the 32 team divisions into 4 conferences that are regional and provide traditional rivalries.
I would suggest that 11 of the 12 games in a schedule should be played within your division.

4-8 team conferences per division
conference winners play to get two regional champions
regional champs play to get a division champion
division champions play for the national championship (same number of games currently being played in the playoff system.

Or we could divide into 3 conferences. 10, 11, 11 (10, 10, 12, etc. or in the case of the B1G division it could be 11, 8, 13)
With conference champions and one "wild card" playing to get regional champs. This might even be the best way to incorporate Notre Dame into the mix. They could play in a conference in each of the two divisions in alternating years (to make conferences 11, 11, 11,they could play USC every year and Navy/Stanford every other year).


I like a permanent home for the championship game similar to Omaha for baseball


From the perspective of a northerner, if tradition were a prime criterion for dividing the programs then I could see them going to a 8, 11, 13 alignment: the former Pac 8; the former Big 8 + Arizona, Arizona State and Utah; and the former Big 10 + PSU, UMD, RU.

Reasons are obvious: Programs like Iowa prefers playing Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota to Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Penn State prefers playing Ohio State and Michigan every year. The old Pac 8 schools would prefer playing games against each other more. The Four Corners programs would be odd fits without the West Coast but are needed to beef up the central part of the country and, also, shifting them eastwards allows the West Coast schools to have more cohesion. In addition, the odd numbers allow programs to schedule the likes of Army, Navy, Air Force, Bowling Green, Toledo, Buffalo, etc., during weeks when they have no games.
11-19-2019 08:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #64
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.
11-19-2019 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Transic_nyc Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

East: BC, RU, UMD, SU, Pitt, PSU, ND, NW

Central: IN, OSU, UM, MSU, PU, IL, WI, MN

West: IA, ISU, KU, NE, CO, UT, AZ, ASU

Pacific: UW, WSU, UO, OSU, Stan, Cal, UCLA, USC


No idea how to organize the other group.
11-20-2019 04:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #66
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.
11-20-2019 05:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #67
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

We aren’t talking about warm and fuzzy realignment—we are talking about realignment forced by the barrel of a gun.

ACC presidents might see WF as critical to to the integrity of their conference but if the powers in the Big Ten, SEC, and leading schools from the other power leagues are consolidating power and revenue WF is the most expendable of the 65. For that matter, there are plenty of schools within that 64 that are also superfluous—Wash St, Ore St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Baylor, TCU, and Duke for that matter.

ESPN isn’t giving up access to any geographical region. They are simply going to have to negotiate with the 2 remaining organizations for rights. My guess is that various T1 and T2 packages will be made available to bidders while T3 inventory will be split between conference networks and streaming services owned by the conferences.
11-20-2019 10:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 10:52 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

We aren’t talking about warm and fuzzy realignment—we are talking about realignment forced by the barrel of a gun.

ACC presidents might see WF as critical to to the integrity of their conference but if the powers in the Big Ten, SEC, and leading schools from the other power leagues are consolidating power and revenue WF is the most expendable of the 65. For that matter, there are plenty of schools within that 64 that are also superfluous—Wash St, Ore St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Baylor, TCU, and Duke for that matter.

ESPN isn’t giving up access to any geographical region. They are simply going to have to negotiate with the 2 remaining organizations for rights. My guess is that various T1 and T2 packages will be made available to bidders while T3 inventory will be split between conference networks and streaming services owned by the conferences.

I think the list of “superfluous” schools is larger. There’s the elite group including the likes of Texas, Ohio St, Florida, etc. There’s the next tier including Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina St, etc. Then there’s the “superfluous” group which is subjective depending on who is making the list.

Mine would be:
PAC: Washington St, Oregon St
XII: TCU, Baylor, Kansas St, Iowa St, West Virginia
B1G: Northwestern, Rutgers
SEC: Vanderbilt
ACC: Wake Forest, Duke, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

To me they all have varying degrees of fitting in with the top groups or being with the next level down. Privates have a harder time, in my opinion. The only privates that are in my first two tiers are Notre Dame, Stanford, USC, and Miami. Miami is a close one for me teetering on the edge.
11-20-2019 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 16,477
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 2968
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #69
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-14-2019 04:44 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  I remember when things went South for Nebraska.

Frank Solich was in charge. The program was good, but not as dominant as Tom Osborne had been. I believe the year was 2001 when they got decimated by Colorado which was in and of itself unusual. Nonetheless, they made the national title game and were embarrassed by Miami.

It's fair to mention that Miami team is one of the best to ever be assembled, but the point is that nothing was the same after that. I looked it up to be sure, but they went 7-7 in 2002(side note: a 14 game season?) Then they went 9-3 in 2003 and that was it for Frank Solich.

It's a rare thing for Nebraska to have had a truly good season since.

Some of the things that made Nebraska great are not coming back, but they should make an effort to play to their strengths. You're just not going to win a ton of recruiting battles with the premier programs around the country. The weather is a part of that...the locale is a part of that. Minnesota is doing great this year, but Minneapolis is a pretty nice place despite the harsh winters. Lincoln has harsh winters and it's a relatively small town by contrast. Even then, it's extraordinarily rare for Minnesota to be good and we'll have to see if it even lasts.

I'm sure Nebraska is a lovely place, but you have to think in terms of what a college athlete is looking for. I don't know that I'd go all the way back to the triple option, but I'd start considering what I could do to take advantage of those Midwestern lineman. That and counting on getting the best skill players from around the country is a losing battle. They have to change their approach.

For example, what made Scott Frost a great player in his time was being hard-nosed. No one would confuse him with Peyton Manning.

They should be looking at emulating the modern Wisconsin and less so the USCs, Ohio States, and Alabamas of the world.

It’s the Curse of Frank Solich.

They ran Coach Solich off and haven’t been worth a **** since. Except for coaching high school football in Omaha for one year, Coach Solich had been involved in football in Lincoln since 1963. He played and coached at Nebraska nearly 40 years and they had zero loyalty to him. They got rid of him after he finished 9-3 in 2003. (They fired Coach Solich before the Alamo Bowl in 2003 that they won to finish 10-3). Since firing Coach Solich Nebraska has lost 4 or more games every season.
11-20-2019 01:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #70
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 12:46 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 10:52 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

We aren’t talking about warm and fuzzy realignment—we are talking about realignment forced by the barrel of a gun.

ACC presidents might see WF as critical to to the integrity of their conference but if the powers in the Big Ten, SEC, and leading schools from the other power leagues are consolidating power and revenue WF is the most expendable of the 65. For that matter, there are plenty of schools within that 64 that are also superfluous—Wash St, Ore St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Baylor, TCU, and Duke for that matter.

ESPN isn’t giving up access to any geographical region. They are simply going to have to negotiate with the 2 remaining organizations for rights. My guess is that various T1 and T2 packages will be made available to bidders while T3 inventory will be split between conference networks and streaming services owned by the conferences.

I think the list of “superfluous” schools is larger. There’s the elite group including the likes of Texas, Ohio St, Florida, etc. There’s the next tier including Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina St, etc. Then there’s the “superfluous” group which is subjective depending on who is making the list.

Mine would be:
PAC: Washington St, Oregon St
XII: TCU, Baylor, Kansas St, Iowa St, West Virginia
B1G: Northwestern, Rutgers
SEC: Vanderbilt
ACC: Wake Forest, Duke, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

To me they all have varying degrees of fitting in with the top groups or being with the next level down. Privates have a harder time, in my opinion. The only privates that are in my first two tiers are Notre Dame, Stanford, USC, and Miami. Miami is a close one for me teetering on the edge.

My litmus test for if a program is superfluous or not is if there is a disparate gap in overall program success and support for a program compared to others on the state/region.

For a state like Ohio it’s easy to see that Ohio St has a far greater following and track record than Cincinnati or any of the MAC schools.

Kentucky is a little different. UK basketball is a top 5 blue blood but the UL program isn’t too shabby and their football at present actually has a bit of an edge over the perennial SEC East cellar dweller so I don’t think they are totally irrelevant if you were trying to build a mega league. Maybe not necessarily a must have, but still a solid asset

Privates really need to have some national success (USC, ND, Miami) to be prominent fixtures
11-20-2019 04:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 04:28 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 12:46 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 10:52 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

We aren’t talking about warm and fuzzy realignment—we are talking about realignment forced by the barrel of a gun.

ACC presidents might see WF as critical to to the integrity of their conference but if the powers in the Big Ten, SEC, and leading schools from the other power leagues are consolidating power and revenue WF is the most expendable of the 65. For that matter, there are plenty of schools within that 64 that are also superfluous—Wash St, Ore St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Baylor, TCU, and Duke for that matter.

ESPN isn’t giving up access to any geographical region. They are simply going to have to negotiate with the 2 remaining organizations for rights. My guess is that various T1 and T2 packages will be made available to bidders while T3 inventory will be split between conference networks and streaming services owned by the conferences.

I think the list of “superfluous” schools is larger. There’s the elite group including the likes of Texas, Ohio St, Florida, etc. There’s the next tier including Colorado, Minnesota, North Carolina St, etc. Then there’s the “superfluous” group which is subjective depending on who is making the list.

Mine would be:
PAC: Washington St, Oregon St
XII: TCU, Baylor, Kansas St, Iowa St, West Virginia
B1G: Northwestern, Rutgers
SEC: Vanderbilt
ACC: Wake Forest, Duke, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College

To me they all have varying degrees of fitting in with the top groups or being with the next level down. Privates have a harder time, in my opinion. The only privates that are in my first two tiers are Notre Dame, Stanford, USC, and Miami. Miami is a close one for me teetering on the edge.

My litmus test for if a program is superfluous or not is if there is a disparate gap in overall program success and support for a program compared to others on the state/region.

For a state like Ohio it’s easy to see that Ohio St has a far greater following and track record than Cincinnati or any of the MAC schools.

Kentucky is a little different. UK basketball is a top 5 blue blood but the UL program isn’t too shabby and their football at present actually has a bit of an edge over the perennial SEC East cellar dweller so I don’t think they are totally irrelevant if you were trying to build a mega league. Maybe not necessarily a must have, but still a solid asset

Privates really need to have some national success (USC, ND, Miami) to be prominent fixtures

Makes sense but lends itself to the subjective point I made previously. I don’t care as much about geography and having an even looking map as much as brand name recognition (including national draw for recruits and fans) and continual high level success.

If I did the same for basketball, my top 2 tiers would be much heavier in the Northeast and Midwest.
11-20-2019 05:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #72
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 10:52 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

We aren’t talking about warm and fuzzy realignment—we are talking about realignment forced by the barrel of a gun.

ACC presidents might see WF as critical to to the integrity of their conference but if the powers in the Big Ten, SEC, and leading schools from the other power leagues are consolidating power and revenue WF is the most expendable of the 65. For that matter, there are plenty of schools within that 64 that are also superfluous—Wash St, Ore St, Kansas St, Iowa St, Baylor, TCU, and Duke for that matter.

ESPN isn’t giving up access to any geographical region. They are simply going to have to negotiate with the 2 remaining organizations for rights. My guess is that various T1 and T2 packages will be made available to bidders while T3 inventory will be split between conference networks and streaming services owned by the conferences.

Sorry to be dismissive of your alignment idea. It is somewhat logical, but not practical.
If we are indeed going to have movement to two divisions
Dividing the Big 12 won't be a problem as their league contract ends in only a few years, while the entire ACC is bound for almost 20 years.
By having the PAC and B1G combine with the old Big 8, the only school that has to be moved out of an existing contract would be Missouri.
With the break-up of the Big 12 the 4 former SWC schools combined with the 14 SEC schools and the 14 ACC schools make the other division. As part of the ACC contract, Notre Dame has been assured semi-independent status until 2037, and I expect them to maintain that semi-independent status until then.
ESPN had the SEC invite Missouri to halt realignment, until things were ready. Ready is 2025.
11-24-2019 11:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
None of this realignment is practical as long as the B1G and SEC make so much more than the rest.

Now if the B1G and SEC could carve up the ACC with ESPN's approval you might get something in the east. But that would probably require Notre Dame to participate to sweeten the pot. It wouldn't be anything but psychological for Notre Dame. You could have them in a group with 6 mandatory conference games. They sometimes are already playing 6 and average 5.
11-24-2019 01:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #74
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
I think the people awaiting P4 are going to be disappointed.

Right now we are in a pause. Networks know the top properties will have significant value in the future they just don't know for sure yet what significant value means or how that value is monetized 5-10 years from now. Is it single team subscriptions? Is it league subscriptions? Sport bundle subscriptions? Pay by game? Pass through subscriptions (HBO model until recently). Carriage fee as new platforms pay to get content to get subscribers.

The actual model and the revenue aren't fully known yet.

Barring some terrible stumble or mistake, a P3 or P2 seems more likely than a P4. Either Big Ten and SEC acquiring the remaining properties of value or the two doing so but not crossing into the mountain and pacific time zones.

The Pac-12 geography is such that you can't easily add eastern teams to them or add them to an eastern league unless you take enough Pac-12 teams to consume all or most the schedule.
11-25-2019 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,795
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #75
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
All we really need to see happen to get a P4 is for everyone to low ball the Big 12 when their rights are up for renewal. When Texas and Oklahoma realize that media outlets aren’t willing to play premium rates for 10 schools when only 2 of them are premium content we will see things start to shift and in the end we will have a P4, a tweener League, and the G5.
11-28-2019 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 25,650
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 1177
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #76
Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
(11-28-2019 11:02 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  All we really need to see happen to get a P4 is for everyone to low ball the Big 12 when their rights are up for renewal. When Texas and Oklahoma realize that media outlets aren’t willing to play premium rates for 10 schools when only 2 of them are premium content we will see things start to shift and in the end we will have a P4, a tweener League, and the G5.


Sounds like you are describing the ACC or PAC 12 too
(This post was last modified: 11-28-2019 11:24 AM by Pony94.)
11-28-2019 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #77
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
Back on the actual topic of this thread.
11-30-2019 12:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Online
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 8,319
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 446
I Root For: conservativism/MAGA
Location: US
Post: #78
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-20-2019 05:49 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(11-19-2019 09:04 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If you’re going to try involving nearly everyone in two 32 team groupings:

Big Ten + PAC 12 + ND + Pitt + Cuse + BC + Kansas + Iowa St

SEC + (ACC - Pitt/Cuse/BC/WF) + (Big 12 - Kansas/Iowa St)

WF is the odd man out, most traditional rivalries, with the exception of some of the old Big 8, get maintained in the new order.

If I'm ESPN, I am not giving up access to the entire Northeast (and Notre Dame) to acquire the multitudes of potential viewers in Kansas and Oklahoma...that's broadcast suicide.
On top of that.....the ACC is not leaving Wake Forest behind, maybe Kansas State would volunteer for elimination instead.

That's being shortsighted on your part too, XLance.

What really needs to happen is for all P5 schools to allow Olympic sports only membership. Just like the ACC isn't going anywhere without WF, the SEC isn't going anywhere without Vandy either. And K-State captures the state of Kansas much better than KU does. With that in mind,
I could see something like this:

SEC b-ball only: Vandy
Big Ten b-ball only: Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers
ACC b-ball only: Duke, WF (you could make the argument that GT & UNC need to be here too, but I will reserve judgement for now)
PAC 12 b-ball only: WSU, OSU
Big 12 b-ball only: KU, ISU
(This post was last modified: 12-01-2019 03:48 AM by DawgNBama.)
12-01-2019 03:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Mav Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,332
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 155
I Root For: Omaha
Location:
Post: #79
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, ...
(11-30-2019 12:50 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Back on the actual topic of this thread.
A lot of factors in play, but that really puts how bad the decay was in perspective, and what a great coach Devaney was considering how horrible Nebraska was before he showed up. It's a shame Nebraska fans and boosters are so enamored with Osborne, when they need a Devaney type who was really the polar opposite of what Osborne was. Osborne was an all-time great, but he didn't build the program. All he did was take what Devaney built and kept it going. You could say that about Frost and George O'Leary at UCF, too.

That being said, it's a little harder to win now than it was in 1962 and the Big Ten's loaded with great coaches. The Big 8 always had half of their teams down around Rutgers's level.
12-01-2019 05:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #80
RE: Nebraska: "if this doesn't work with Scott, it's probably not going to work, period"
Nebraska needs to be in a conference with Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri and Colorado in order to be relevant. Nebraska knows it and so do we.
Face it realignment as been settled for quite some time with one sticky exception........Texas.

We all know that the Big 8 will re-form as a division of the PAC/B1G alliance. Missouri can't survive in the SEC and everybody knows it, and will have to move back "home".

The placement of Texas seems to be the stumbling block.
With the Big 8 teams leaving for the PAC/B1G (with Missouri) that leaves the old SWC teams (Texas, Texas Tech, TCU and Baylor) plus West Virginia to fill the 5 vacancies for the SEC/ACC alliance.
If Texas wants their own division in the SEC then it's going to require one SEC school to move to the ACC with West Virginia.
If Texas agrees to move to the ACC with Baylor (most likely Texas choice ) that means the SEC has to accept the very un-sexy threesome of West Virginia, TCU and Texas Tech.

At this point my projection would be:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State to the PAC
Missouri and Iowa State to the B1G
Texas, Texas Tech, TCU and Baylor to the SEC
West Virginia and Kentucky to the ACC.


All of these moves are doable in one fell swoop, but timing is everything.
12-02-2019 06:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.