(07-18-2020 08:39 AM)ken d Wrote:  If you are starting over, why would you organize into 14 team conferences? That may be the worst possible number. I would use a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 10 if I were doing something like this.

I did something like a while back and there really wasn’t a challenge to it. It really became a geography lesson. The power conferences are “trending” at 14 which I why I settled on that number.

I actually feel BePcrO7 did a fine job with this and enjoyed reading.

He noted it was a "fun exercise," so there is no need to be dismissive toward him.

This is just inane. I’m sorry...

I don't think there is a one size fits all for conferences. The Ivy, at 8 members is the smallest conference, at least until the MEAC drops to 8 in July 2021. But the Ivy is probably the most stable and definitely the most highly regarded conference academically. They are in no danger of losing members, for the very long haul, and they have no reason to add anyone new. But the soon to be 8 member MEAC badly needs to add new members.

Nine members was a pretty ideal number for many years for both FBS and FCS football because it allowed a full round robin and a fair and square four home and four road games for each member. Nine also easily allows basketball a double round robin, 16-game schedule. But it is too small for a CCG, and in basketball, the trend nationally is 18-20 conference games for hoops because there are fewer non conference games available than there were in years past. Nine also often makes one team to have to take an off week/day while the other 8 play, or have to get a non conference game.

Ten allows for a CCG and the option of play 8 out of 9 opponents in football, with 4 home and 4 away, or full round robin but an imbalance of home and road. Ten also minimizes the number of mouths to feed, but also is more vulnerable to should a raid occur than if the league had more members. Ten allows an 18-game double round robin in hoops.

Eleven makes having a CCG tricky on football, and a round robing 10 games is pretty much never done. But 11 isn't too bad in hoops. Leagues can go to a 20 games schedule if they want or opt for fewer games. Eleven is the average number in D1 these days.

Twelve is common, too. Twelve makes round robin in football nearly impossible. Double round robin is possible in hoops, which is what the Horizon League is doing since non conference games are decreasing in availability. Twelve lends itself to football divisions. In an 8 game football schedule, everyone plays everyone at least twice every five years. Even more frequently with 9 games. Twelve leaves some buffer in case a league is raided.

I don't see a lot if positives for having 13 members. I'll need help with that one. Only the Southland has 13.

Fourteen or more seems like an obvious attempt at simply grabbing TV markets and maximizing revenue. It seems to make good business sense for P5 leagues. I'm not so sure it makes a lot of sense for the A-10 or C-USA because there are so many mouths to feed, but it does leave a lot of buffer in the case of a raid.

Fifteen is only used by one league, the ACC. Straight up all about revenue production.

16+ is in the territory where a split seems like only a matter of time (see WAC, 1999 and Big East, 2013).

(07-18-2020 09:21 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I actually feel BePcrO7 did a fine job with this and enjoyed reading.

He noted it was a "fun exercise," so there is no need to be dismissive toward him.

I didn't mean to be dismissive. I don't believe that the three P5 conferences that are currently at 14 members got there because they thought that was a good number. I thought they did despite it being an awkward number. For less well-heeled schools, it is IMO an awful number, which accomplishes little but increased travel time and cost. And since "less well-heeled" describes most of D-I, that's an important consideration.

(07-18-2020 10:32 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I don't think there is a one size fits all for conferences. The Ivy, at 8 members is the smallest conference, at least until the MEAC drops to 8 in July 2021. But the Ivy is probably the most stable and definitely the most highly regarded conference academically. They are in no danger of losing members, for the very long haul, and they have no reason to add anyone new. But the soon to be 8 member MEAC badly needs to add new members.

Nine members was a pretty ideal number for many years for both FBS and FCS football because it allowed a full round robin and a fair and square four home and four road games for each member. Nine also easily allows basketball a double round robin, 16-game schedule. But it is too small for a CCG, and in basketball, the trend nationally is 18-20 conference games for hoops because there are fewer non conference games available than there were in years past. Nine also often makes one team to have to take an off week/day while the other 8 play, or have to get a non conference game.

Ten allows for a CCG and the option of play 8 out of 9 opponents in football, with 4 home and 4 away, or full round robin but an imbalance of home and road. Ten also minimizes the number of mouths to feed, but also is more vulnerable to should a raid occur than if the league had more members. Ten allows an 18-game double round robin in hoops.

Eleven makes having a CCG tricky on football, and a round robing 10 games is pretty much never done. But 11 isn't too bad in hoops. Leagues can go to a 20 games schedule if they want or opt for fewer games. Eleven is the average number in D1 these days.

Twelve is common, too. Twelve makes round robin in football nearly impossible. Double round robin is possible in hoops, which is what the Horizon League is doing since non conference games are decreasing in availability. Twelve lends itself to football divisions. In an 8 game football schedule, everyone plays everyone at least twice every five years. Even more frequently with 9 games. Twelve leaves some buffer in case a league is raided.

I don't see a lot if positives for having 13 members. I'll need help with that one. Only the Southland has 13.

Fourteen or more seems like an obvious attempt at simply grabbing TV markets and maximizing revenue. It seems to make good business sense for P5 leagues. I'm not so sure it makes a lot of sense for the A-10 or C-USA because there are so many mouths to feed, but it does leave a lot of buffer in the case of a raid.

Fifteen is only used by one league, the ACC. Straight up all about revenue production.

16+ is in the territory where a split seems like only a matter of time (see WAC, 1999 and Big East, 2013).

I knew this going into the exercise but it really hit home when trying to fit schools together. Sometimes limits like geography, academics, and others make different numbers the only feasible route.

(07-18-2020 10:34 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:21 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I actually feel BePcrO7 did a fine job with this and enjoyed reading.

He noted it was a "fun exercise," so there is no need to be dismissive toward him.

I didn't mean to be dismissive. I don't believe that the three P5 conferences that are currently at 14 members got there because they thought that was a good number. I thought they did despite it being an awkward number. For less well-heeled schools, it is IMO an awful number, which accomplishes little but increased travel time and cost. And since "less well-heeled" describes most of D-I, that's an important consideration.

It’s not a good number and I never said it was - it just worked with 350 schools. I now despise it after this lol.

(07-18-2020 12:26 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 10:32 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I don't think there is a one size fits all for conferences. The Ivy, at 8 members is the smallest conference, at least until the MEAC drops to 8 in July 2021. But the Ivy is probably the most stable and definitely the most highly regarded conference academically. They are in no danger of losing members, for the very long haul, and they have no reason to add anyone new. But the soon to be 8 member MEAC badly needs to add new members.

Nine members was a pretty ideal number for many years for both FBS and FCS football because it allowed a full round robin and a fair and square four home and four road games for each member. Nine also easily allows basketball a double round robin, 16-game schedule. But it is too small for a CCG, and in basketball, the trend nationally is 18-20 conference games for hoops because there are fewer non conference games available than there were in years past. Nine also often makes one team to have to take an off week/day while the other 8 play, or have to get a non conference game.

Ten allows for a CCG and the option of play 8 out of 9 opponents in football, with 4 home and 4 away, or full round robin but an imbalance of home and road. Ten also minimizes the number of mouths to feed, but also is more vulnerable to should a raid occur than if the league had more members. Ten allows an 18-game double round robin in hoops.

Eleven makes having a CCG tricky on football, and a round robing 10 games is pretty much never done. But 11 isn't too bad in hoops. Leagues can go to a 20 games schedule if they want or opt for fewer games. Eleven is the average number in D1 these days.

Twelve is common, too. Twelve makes round robin in football nearly impossible. Double round robin is possible in hoops, which is what the Horizon League is doing since non conference games are decreasing in availability. Twelve lends itself to football divisions. In an 8 game football schedule, everyone plays everyone at least twice every five years. Even more frequently with 9 games. Twelve leaves some buffer in case a league is raided.

I don't see a lot if positives for having 13 members. I'll need help with that one. Only the Southland has 13.

Fourteen or more seems like an obvious attempt at simply grabbing TV markets and maximizing revenue. It seems to make good business sense for P5 leagues. I'm not so sure it makes a lot of sense for the A-10 or C-USA because there are so many mouths to feed, but it does leave a lot of buffer in the case of a raid.

Fifteen is only used by one league, the ACC. Straight up all about revenue production.

16+ is in the territory where a split seems like only a matter of time (see WAC, 1999 and Big East, 2013).

I knew this going into the exercise but it really hit home when trying to fit schools together. Sometimes limits like geography, academics, and others make different numbers the only feasible route.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to be critical because I knew this was just a fun exercise. I was just kind of talking in general and got carried away spelling everything out. Lol.

(07-18-2020 12:29 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 12:26 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 10:32 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I don't think there is a one size fits all for conferences. The Ivy, at 8 members is the smallest conference, at least until the MEAC drops to 8 in July 2021. But the Ivy is probably the most stable and definitely the most highly regarded conference academically. They are in no danger of losing members, for the very long haul, and they have no reason to add anyone new. But the soon to be 8 member MEAC badly needs to add new members.

Nine members was a pretty ideal number for many years for both FBS and FCS football because it allowed a full round robin and a fair and square four home and four road games for each member. Nine also easily allows basketball a double round robin, 16-game schedule. But it is too small for a CCG, and in basketball, the trend nationally is 18-20 conference games for hoops because there are fewer non conference games available than there were in years past. Nine also often makes one team to have to take an off week/day while the other 8 play, or have to get a non conference game.

Ten allows for a CCG and the option of play 8 out of 9 opponents in football, with 4 home and 4 away, or full round robin but an imbalance of home and road. Ten also minimizes the number of mouths to feed, but also is more vulnerable to should a raid occur than if the league had more members. Ten allows an 18-game double round robin in hoops.

Eleven makes having a CCG tricky on football, and a round robing 10 games is pretty much never done. But 11 isn't too bad in hoops. Leagues can go to a 20 games schedule if they want or opt for fewer games. Eleven is the average number in D1 these days.

Twelve is common, too. Twelve makes round robin in football nearly impossible. Double round robin is possible in hoops, which is what the Horizon League is doing since non conference games are decreasing in availability. Twelve lends itself to football divisions. In an 8 game football schedule, everyone plays everyone at least twice every five years. Even more frequently with 9 games. Twelve leaves some buffer in case a league is raided.

I don't see a lot if positives for having 13 members. I'll need help with that one. Only the Southland has 13.

Fourteen or more seems like an obvious attempt at simply grabbing TV markets and maximizing revenue. It seems to make good business sense for P5 leagues. I'm not so sure it makes a lot of sense for the A-10 or C-USA because there are so many mouths to feed, but it does leave a lot of buffer in the case of a raid.

Fifteen is only used by one league, the ACC. Straight up all about revenue production.

16+ is in the territory where a split seems like only a matter of time (see WAC, 1999 and Big East, 2013).

I knew this going into the exercise but it really hit home when trying to fit schools together. Sometimes limits like geography, academics, and others make different numbers the only feasible route.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to be critical because I knew this was just a fun exercise. I was just kind of talking in general and got carried away spelling everything out. Lol.

No worries - criticism is necessary. I think it helps with all the realignment ideas by reinforcing that limits do exist.

(07-18-2020 10:34 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:21 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  I actually feel BePcrO7 did a fine job with this and enjoyed reading.

He noted it was a "fun exercise," so there is no need to be dismissive toward him.

I didn't mean to be dismissive. I don't believe that the three P5 conferences that are currently at 14 members got there because they thought that was a good number. I thought they did despite it being an awkward number. For less well-heeled schools, it is IMO an awful number, which accomplishes little but increased travel time and cost. And since "less well-heeled" describes most of D-I, that's an important consideration.

I'm not sure I thought you specifically were being dismissive, ken d. My main point (poorly made) is that when folks on the board make clear the "exercise" they have undertaken is for enjoyment and a hypothetical, we simply need to accept it for what it is. I'm sure you and most others on the board feel the same way.

As to the 14 number, I actually like it. But many don't and I respect their right not to. I'm probably in the minority.

(07-17-2020 03:15 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  WCC: Air Force, BYU, Denver, Gonzaga, Grand Canyon, Loyola Marymount, Pacific, Pepperdine, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Seattle, St. Mary's

BIG SKY: Boise St, Colorado St, Eastern Washington, Idaho, Montana, Montana St, Nevada, New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Sacramento St, UNLV, Utah St, Weber St, Wyoming

BIG WEST: Cal Poly, Cal St - Bakersfield, Cal St - Fullerton, Cal St - Northridge, Fresno St, Hawaii, Long Beach St, San Diego St, San Jose St, UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, US San Diego, UC Santa Barbara

SOUTHLAND: Central Arkansas, Lamar, Little Rock, McNeese St, New Orleans, Nicholls St, Northwestern St, Oral Roberts, Sam Houston St, Southeastern Louisiana, Stephen F. Austin St, Texas St, UL Monroe, UT Arlington

SUMMIT: Chicago St, Cleveland St, Fort Wayne, Green Bay, Kansas City, Milwaukee, North Dakota, North Dakota St, Omaha, South Dakota, South Dakota St, St. Thomas, Western Illinois, Wright St

WAC: Abilene Christian, California Baptist, Dixie St, Houston Baptist, Idaho St, Incarnate Word, New Mexico St, Northern Colorado, Portland St, Southern Utah, TAMU - CC, Tarleton St, Utah Valley, UTRGV

I give you a lot of credit for putting the effort in. I could never do it. That said, there are a few conference realignments that make no sense to me:

1. Southland Conference: I would say that Texas State going back to the Southland would be a definite "NO." They are not dropping back down to FCS. Oral Roberts spent two years in the Southland and went running back to the Summit.

2. Summit: Fort Wayne just left the Summit officially about two weeks ago, so that does not make sense. Chicago State was thrown out by the Summit years ago. I don't think they are not going to make that mistake again. Why would Wright State and Green Bay want to join a Dakota league?

3. WCC: This is where the 14 team setup does not make sense. The WCC is better off at ten, but if they expand then maybe to 12, with my guess being Seattle and Denver. Air Force is a football school and GCU's model and academics might cause concern for the Presidents.

4. Big Sky & Big West: What happened to the Mountain West Conference?

5. WAC: I am wondering why the WAC would want Idaho State and Portland State in their conference? I like the addition of Abilene Christian and Incarnate Word, but I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish with the WAC?

(07-18-2020 10:29 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-17-2020 03:15 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  WCC: Air Force, BYU, Denver, Gonzaga, Grand Canyon, Loyola Marymount, Pacific, Pepperdine, Portland, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Clara, Seattle, St. Mary's

BIG SKY: Boise St, Colorado St, Eastern Washington, Idaho, Montana, Montana St, Nevada, New Mexico, Northern Arizona, Sacramento St, UNLV, Utah St, Weber St, Wyoming

BIG WEST: Cal Poly, Cal St - Bakersfield, Cal St - Fullerton, Cal St - Northridge, Fresno St, Hawaii, Long Beach St, San Diego St, San Jose St, UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Riverside, US San Diego, UC Santa Barbara

SOUTHLAND: Central Arkansas, Lamar, Little Rock, McNeese St, New Orleans, Nicholls St, Northwestern St, Oral Roberts, Sam Houston St, Southeastern Louisiana, Stephen F. Austin St, Texas St, UL Monroe, UT Arlington

SUMMIT: Chicago St, Cleveland St, Fort Wayne, Green Bay, Kansas City, Milwaukee, North Dakota, North Dakota St, Omaha, South Dakota, South Dakota St, St. Thomas, Western Illinois, Wright St

WAC: Abilene Christian, California Baptist, Dixie St, Houston Baptist, Idaho St, Incarnate Word, New Mexico St, Northern Colorado, Portland St, Southern Utah, TAMU - CC, Tarleton St, Utah Valley, UTRGV

I give you a lot of credit for putting the effort in. I could never do it. That said, there are a few conference realignments that make no sense to me:

1. Southland Conference: I would say that Texas State going back to the Southland would be a definite "NO." They are not dropping back down to FCS. Oral Roberts spent two years in the Southland and went running back to the Summit.

2. Summit: Fort Wayne just left the Summit officially about two weeks ago, so that does not make sense. Chicago State was thrown out by the Summit years ago. I don't think they are not going to make that mistake again. Why would Wright State and Green Bay want to join a Dakota league?

3. WCC: This is where the 14 team setup does not make sense. The WCC is better off at ten, but if they expand then maybe to 12, with my guess being Seattle and Denver. Air Force is a football school and GCU's model and academics might cause concern for the Presidents.

4. Big Sky & Big West: What happened to the Mountain West Conference?

5. WAC: I am wondering why the WAC would want Idaho State and Portland State in their conference? I like the addition of Abilene Christian and Incarnate Word, but I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish with the WAC?

In general, it was impossible to play by the rules I preset and maintain several of the conferences like the Mountain West, for example. There are only 63 (depending on how you count) western schools and strong identities in already 3 conferences (PAC, WCC, BIG WEST). That doesn’t leave much room so somethings gotta give. That’s how some of the conferences were created. Now to each point:

1. Texas St has been a disappointment in FBS. They have a relatively incredibly high ceiling which I hope they realize. They’ll never choose to go back to FCS but given the rules and their lack of success, this was a move I made.

2. The Summit was easier to form than most. The Dakotas plus lower level, city-based Division I schools - many of which were branch campuses. Unfortunately, there really was nowhere else to put Chicago St so someone had to associate with them. Fort Wayne just didn’t have the cache to end up anywhere else.

3. WCC takes a hit with Seattle and Grand Canyon but GCU is getting better. Seattle is a former member and fits the conference - city-based Catholic school. Air Force could have gone into the Big Sky or another conference, but (like Army and Navy) I placed them into an all-private school conference. Further, the WCC couldn’t be a football-playing conference so their team would go elsewhere and AFA doesn’t put much into any other sport.

4. As stated before, some things had to give and the Mountain West was one of them. The Big West needed 3 and the 3 California State schools in the Mountain West fit pretty well. Sending Air Force to the WCC and you got 7 schools left to join 7 other schools. This could easily be named the Mountain West. I just like Big Sky as a name better.

5. Like the real world, the WAC is a “who’s left” rather than a “who’s who.” The Southland has some, for a lack of better terms, deadweight with too many Texas schools. Sending the group to the WAC allowed for easier travel.