https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

(08-20-2020 08:54 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

In the expansions of 1990 to 92 the SEC discussed at length the strategies they would impose in the event of the Big 10 attempting to move down the East Coast into the Southeast. At the time Jackie Sherrill spoke of the defensive plan to move to 20 taking in Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, possibly Miami and trying to pick up schools in states of North Carolina and Virginia.

It was considered a matter of protecting branding. That sentiment is even stronger today, especially when many consider Florida State and Clemson to be the two most SEC like schools.

Adding to the stress are the concerns that led Florida to sponsor Florida State for membership in '91 and led both Florida and South Carolina to be willing to sponsor Florida State and Clemson for membership in 2010 prompting Slive to ask for the much misreported gentlemen's agreement which actually asked South Carolina and Florida to hold off on such nominations until the requirements of the re-negotiation clause with ESPN were met, which required two new markets to be added before the payouts could be re-negotiated. Slive's promise was that after 2010-2 only profitability would be considered. Now that we've moved into a content driven pay model more than a market driven one (though that is still important to T3 agreements and conference networks) the additions of Clemson and Florida State would be urged by people in those two states since all 4 schools use the ticket availability of those annual games for the basis of their donations to the athletic fund.

With Georgia Tech there has been some pressure in the past by the legislature to include Tech in any expansion because of the budgetary needs of Georgia Tech and because the UGa / Tech game is another game, especially for Tech fans, that draws donations for tickets. Georgia does have Auburn and Florida tickets which also figure in.

In 2010-2 Kentucky was the only SEC member not to express interest in adding their in state rival.

So for the protection of those games, and for the protection of branding within our own region I'm confident the SEC would pursue those schools in the event of a raid on the ACC by the Big 10.

But there is another possibility you ignore. The SEC could easily accommodate Ohio State, Iowa, Wisconsin and Michigan, or even Indiana. If you joined the SEC simply as a 4 to 6 team division of former Big 10 schools the media payouts for all concerned would hit near 100 million per school per year and the ticket revenue would only go up. Add Penn State in place of Indiana and you now have 7 venues of over 100,000 in which to play games. The revenue from the synergy of the natural rivalries, the size of the loyal fan bases, and the level of play would have to be considered and such a move gives all of those schools regular access to Southeastern recruiting. Now if Texas, Oklahoma, Clemson and Florida State wanted to join that we would essentially have a self contained playoff for the national championship annually.

That aside the schools that would legitimately be in play for your breakaway would be Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Virginia, North Carolina, Pittsburgh and possibly Notre Dame. You might even draw Oregon, Washington, Stanford and U.S.C. for another super conference like the one the SEC would assemble with Clemson and Florida State.

I see that more of a viable plan given what I know to be conference strategies in the SEC.

And I would add to that getting ESPN on board as your primary carrier would be essential for landing Texas, or any ACC schools.

That said I also don't rule out the potential (not likelihood) of a Nebraska bolting for old friends and old recruiting grounds, or a Penn State joining with Notre Dame to make the ACC a very viable contender in the East.

Honestly, what do you think this conference would be worth:

Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

My guess is between 110 to 120 million per school per year.

The four division champions become your CFP.

(08-20-2020 08:54 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

Thanks for sharing your Facebook post, Snooki.

Warren will get canned and the Big Ten will go out and get new leadership. Warren has pissed off some very important players in the game of Big Ten politics and these missteps will not easily be forgotten.

This is not the leadership that the Big Ten membership want guiding the next tv negotiations nor spearheading future expansion moves. The man has to go.

As far as the OP goes, I don’t think things are bad enough to merit a walk out unless the other presidents are unwilling to vote Warren out.

Warren is the successor, not predecessor. FYI

It would probably be easier to just get rid of the guy.

Breaking away and starting a new conference? Ha

(08-20-2020 08:54 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

Carolina, Duke, and UVa have been able to get their way in the ACC since the mid 1960's. They are not going to be willing to enter into a situation where they have to eat **** from UM and Wisky. That's the problem with the strong cultural core of any of the major conferences. The Big 10 could draw MD only because Lance Kirwan wanted the move. VT, NC State, Pitt, and Syracuse are the only schools that the B10 can attract and meet general Big 10 metrics of top research institutions and a university set up that matches many of those in the B10. Politically it is easier for NC State to move to the B10 than the SEC based on the politics in North Carolina. These four are also used to having to compromise in the face of a more powerful duo or trifecta.

If you want to see if it will work, look at the cross pollination of staff between the ACC schools and Big 10 - using State as an example, the cross pollination is with Purdue, Ohio State, and Penn State. However the NC State fan base is more southern than eastern a phenomenon at work at VT but not as bad.

@ JRsec
I do think a 24 team league would earn considerable cash but it would ruin the North vs South friendly rivalry that has driven the popularity of college football these many years. Traditionally there were 2 major northern ( Big10 & Big8) and 3 major southern conferences (ACC, SEC, SWC) the PAC has also been there but really until recently that was just USC). Consolidation occurred and the Big8 & SWC merged, independents joined conferences the Big East came and went but the true North vs South rivalry has always been the SEC vs the Big Ten. There are certainly large valuable schools outside of those two.... But not many. Until Kevin Warren I would never have thought the B1G could break up, but now if it were to happen I see the Eastern division mostly merging with select ACC schools making a true Eastern behemoth both northern and southern divisions. And the Western divisions merging with Big 12 or sucking up programs to form their own league
Big 12
North: Kansas, KSU, Nebraska, Iowa St, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
South: Oklahoma, Okie St, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Tulsa

Newly formed Central Conference
East: Purdue, Indiana, Cincinnati, Eastern Carolina, Georgia State, USF, UCF
West: Sparty, Northwestern, Illinois, Louisville, Memphis, SMU, Houston

Newly Formed Eastern Conference
North: Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, WVA, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland
South: UVA, VA Tech, Duke, UNC, NC State, Clemson, GT, FSU

(08-20-2020 10:56 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @ JRsec
I do think a 24 team league would earn considerable cash but it would ruin the North vs South friendly rivalry that has driven the popularity of college football these many years. Traditionally there were 2 major northern ( Big10 & Big8) and 3 major southern conferences (ACC, SEC, SWC) the PAC has also been there but really until recently that was just USC). Consolidation occurred and the Big8 & SWC merged, independents joined conferences the Big East came and went but the true North vs South rivalry has always been the SEC vs the Big Ten. There are certainly large valuable schools outside of those two.... But not many. Until Kevin Warren I would never have thought the B1G could break up, but now if it were to happen I see the Eastern division mostly merging with select ACC schools making a true Eastern behemoth both northern and southern divisions. And the Western divisions merging with Big 12 or sucking up programs to form their own league
Big 12
North: Kansas, KSU, Nebraska, Iowa St, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
South: Oklahoma, Okie St, Texas, Texas Tech, Baylor, TCU, Tulsa

Newly formed Central Conference
East: Purdue, Indiana, Cincinnati, Eastern Carolina, Georgia State, USF, UCF
West: Sparty, Northwestern, Illinois, Louisville, Memphis, SMU, Houston

Newly Formed Eastern Conference
North: Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, WVA, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland
South: UVA, VA Tech, Duke, UNC, NC State, Clemson, GT, FSU

It has the same problem most realignment scenarios run into, the leftover conference which in this case is the new central conference which is a collection of schools with nothing in common and Georgia State is nowhere near that classification yet.

The SEC would still move to solidify the Southeast. Eventually the football first schools of the Big 10 were at least going to need scheduling alliances in the Southeast to have the recruiting ties they need to remain competitive. It truly has been a regional sport now for about the last 20 years with pockets of solid interest in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and parts of Kentucky. New England and the Pacific West are slowly drifting away, and it's been a while now since a champ came out of Texas or Oklahoma but both of those areas are still very viable and could produce at any time with the right leadership.

What I proposed is actually a delivery system for what have been the most frequent CFP entrants and by playing each other the lure for recruits will be somewhat equalized helping the Big 10 football first schools to remain competitive.

Why not go small:

ACC
North - ND/Pitt/PSU/Syr/BC
Central - MD/UVa/VT/UNC/NCSU
South - Duke/WF/Clemson/GT/Miami

SEC
East - UF/FSU/UGa/Auburn/SC
Cenral - Bama/TN/Vandy/Ky/LSU
West - TAMU/MSU/Ark/Ole Miss/Texas

B10

East - Rutgers/OSU/Indiana/Purdue/Michigan
North - Minn/Wisky/NW/Ill/Michigan State
West - Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Mizzou/Oklahoma

P15
North - WSU/Washington/Oregon/OSU/Stanford
West - USC/UCLA/Cal/ASU/Colorado
South - Arizona/Utah/TT/TCU/ISU

End of P-4 and Varsity Championship Level

American

North - Army/Temple/Navy/WVa/ECU/UCF
Central - USF/Tulane/Memphis/Louis/Cincy/KSU
West - Houston/SMU/OSU/Baylor/UTEP/BYU

MW

North - BC or Alberta, Simon Fraser, Boise State, Wyoming
Central - CSU, Air Force, New Mexico, Utah State
West - UNLV, SDSU, SJST, Fresno

Sun/USA

North - Marshall/JMU/ODU/ASU/Charlotte/Coastal Carolina
South - Ga State/Ga Southern/FIU/FAU/UAB/USA
West - S Miss/Middle TN/Tulsa/Texas State/W Kentucy/Ark State

MAC - plus UMass and enough to get to 15

This ends the G-4 or JV league

(08-20-2020 08:54 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

To me, I would give him a raise. You are not there behind what went down with Warren and the Presidents' of the schools. To me, there are miscommunications with the ADs and their Presidents. With the Pandemic crisis still going on, football players catching the virus, and the outbreaks now coming on college campuses because of students want to party in large crowds? I do not think it is safe to play football this fall. Penn. State, Ohio State and other schools will get hit hard. Indiana, Northwestern and some other Big 10 schools had players down with it. 1 nearly died. You people who want football to play this fall think that the virus is a joke. It is not. There are a lot of unknowns with it, and trying to play through this is like playing Russian Roullette with these kids' lives. 5 out of the 6 will be no bullets. The 6th, we will have a dead player from this virus.

@DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population. If the odds are more or less equal of anyone getting the virus, then players or socially distanced fans are no more at risk than going to Walmart.
I've also seen "protests" all over the country... They aren't social distancing, yet they get a pass. If they can protest (with no testing) explain to me why players under doctor's supervision (and being regularly tested) can't play?

P.s. I'm a black man so don't go name calling, you might regret it.

If anyone thinks Penn State, Wisconsin and Michigan will be joining any group to play football this fall they haven’t been paying attention.

Some things are bigger than football.

(08-20-2020 10:47 PM)Statefan Wrote:  ... However the NC State fan base is more southern than eastern a phenomenon at work at VT but not as bad.

Does it need to be pointed out that when you're talking about college football fan bases that Southern is better than Eastern? Not 'as bad'.

(08-20-2020 08:54 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  https://m.facebook.com/permalink.php?sto...1498798014

I can't express the level of disappointment I felt when the B1G cancelled the season. I recently saw Kevin Warren on the BTN talking about his propensity to "over-communicate", then he pulls off this sugar honey iced-tea with essentially no communication, ughh!
Isn't it amazing how much trust Delany had an inside of a year from his retirement a mutiny is at hand because of the ineptitude of his predecessor.
Reasons that Kevin Warren (and he alone) made this call are pure speculation but likely have to do with amateurism and the legal case to pay players, but at this point nothing is going to stop that train anyway so why ruin your programs?
Anyway, word around the campfire is that 4 schools led by Ohio State along with Penn State, Iowa, and Nebraska are attempting to have a double round-robin season (link above). They are trying to convince Michigan and Wisconsin to join them but ultimately they will need 2 other programs to join them to make the plan work. You have to understand that those 6 schools basically represent the strength of the B1G and there is no way that the B1G could consider kicking them out so this is an absolute pump move by these schools. Let's take a sec and look at potential target schools to join the mutiny.
Group 1: Rutgers & Maryland (don't have political support nor the clout within the conference to take such a risk)
Group 2: Northwestern & Minnesota (in regions decimated by recent upheaval, also probably lack political support to swim against the grain.
Group 3. Indiana, Purdue, & Illinois. (These are the fallback schools) they are in areas that would have political support but don't really add much to the viewership.
Group 4. Michigan, Wisconsin, & Sparty (these schools represent the rest of the power of the B1G and the "4 dissenters" have to get 2 of these. Sparty is presently in transition so the clear-cut mandatory schools are UM and UW.

If the new Commissioner, Kevin Warren, insists on not having a season and these 6 break away, they would be in an EXTREMELY powerful position to do whatever the hell they want to do in relationship to a new Big Ten. Cherry pick only the schools they want out of the Big Ten and add a smattering of desirable schools based on locale or recruiting. That being said I think Maryland & Rutgers would be 7 & 8 because of population and recruiting territory, Delany added them for a reason and if nothing else that reason is recruiting.
My point is that I foresee a situation with the rebellious 6 like the WCHA dropping UAB and the Alaska schools and forming a new conference of essentially the same members. Dropping the least valuable rustbelt schools and either going East after the heart of the ACC or more likely going West after the heart of the Big 12 and more generally the state of Texas. They could jettison maybe Northwestern and Purdue and add maybe Oklahoma and Texas and magically the East and West divisions would be balanced. They could also expand past fourteen to 16 or 20 to go after the Mid-Atlantic and Southern States of the ACC. If Texas and Oklahoma were already in the boat you'd probably need to add six ACC schools for any of them to come anyway (something like: UVA, Carolina, Duke, Clemson, Georgia Tech, and Florida State) expecting VA Tech and NC State to go to the SEC and the southern schools to be less desirable to the SEC because they already have schools in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina.

Your arrogance is showing.
The B1G or a core of what was the B1G is in no position to add, take or invite anybody.

My words in Bold

(08-20-2020 11:50 PM)Statefan Wrote:  ...ACC
North - ND/Pitt/PSU/Syr/BC
Central - MD/UVa/VT/UNC/NCSU
South - Duke/WF/Clemson/GT/Miami

I think it's best to keep UNC, UVA and Duke together.
So:

ACC
North - ND/Pitt/PSU/Syr/BC
Central - MD/UVa/VT/UNC/Duke
South - NCSU/WF/Clemson/GT/Miami

Otherwise that looks fantastic.

(08-20-2020 11:50 PM)Statefan Wrote:  SEC
East - UF/FSU/UGa/Auburn/SC
Cenral - Bama/TN/Vandy/Ky/LSU
West - TAMU/MSU/Ark/Ole Miss/Texas

I think it's more important to keep Bama and Auburn together than TN and Vandy. And putting LSU in the West and keeping some geographic symmetry is more important than keeping LSU and Bama together.
So:

SEC
East - UF/FSU/UGa/SC/TN
Cenral - Auburn/Bama/Ky/MSU/Ole Miss/
West - LSU/TAMU/Ark/Texas/Vandy

But that's just my opinion. Your breakdown keeps a deeper numbers of preferred rivals together. So, your alignment would probably be chosen over mine.

(08-20-2020 11:50 PM)Statefan Wrote:  B10
East - Rutgers/OSU/Indiana/Purdue/Michigan
North - Minn/Wisky/NW/Ill/Michigan State
West - Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Mizzou/Oklahoma

Again, I think keeping MSU with Mich and tOSU is more important than keeping the 2 Indiana schools together even if it creates a weak division. It increases the number of marquee match ups in the East.
So:

B10
East - Rutgers/OSU/Indiana/Michigan/Michigan State
North - Minn/Wisky/NW/Ill/Purdue
West - Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Mizzou/Oklahoma

(08-20-2020 11:50 PM)Statefan Wrote:  P15
North - WSU/Washington/Oregon/OSU/Stanford
West - USC/UCLA/Cal/ASU/Colorado
South - Arizona/Utah/TT/TCU/ISU

The best you can do geographically with the pac 15 is only have 1 division spread out all over the place. I'm sure Stanford would rather play with the other Cali schools. So what I'm going to do, is instead of adding TT, TCU and ISU. I'm going to add Boise St, SDSU and Houston.
So:

P15
North - WSU/Washington/Oregon/OSU/Boise State
West - USC/UCLA/Cal/Stanford/SDSU
South - Arizona/ASU/Utah/Colorado/Houston

The former Trucker school in Boise would never be admitted to the Pac-12 but geographically it's a nice fit. 4 Cali schools is too many as is, so adding a 5th without going to 20 teams is probably a no go. Why did I add Houston as opposed to 3 established P5 schools like ISU, TCU or TT. Well, ISU is no where near anyone else in the conference and doesn't represent a big state or media market, so they're out. TT has the third largest fan base in the state but are way away from Austin, Dallas, Ft Worth, Houston or San Antonio. In other words they're in the middle of nowhere, they're out. TCU is a private school in a big media market and has a consistent long history now of good football with no fear of losing their coach However.... Houston is a large public school that is the center of their own system that has vastly improving academic and research credentials in the fastest growing part of the country. Oh and the richest high school football recruiting area in America short of maybe Miami. I think Houston has a much brighter future of anyone else that could fit into the Pac 15.

The American was at 11 and I took out Houston. So, I'd leave them at 10 + Wichita.

Edit : Added later...

American
East - Army/Navy/Temple/WVa/ODU/ECU/Memphis/Louis/Cincy/UCF
West - Air Force/KSU/OSU/Tulsa/Baylor/SMU/TT/TCU/Tulane/USF (Wichita - non football)

(Army,Navy and Air Force football only)

My first draft of the AAC had 2 concise divisions and one horrible national division. So, I nuked that division, left out BYU, Iowa St and moved some of the other schools around and had 2 10-team divisions with only USF and UCF as outliers.

(08-21-2020 01:06 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population.

What happens after the season is over? Do the athletes continue to remain on campus because it's safer for them? Or are schools just trying to keep them safe for football season and then send them back to their dangerous environment?

(08-21-2020 07:09 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 01:06 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population.

What happens after the season is over? Do the athletes continue to remain on campus because it's safer for them? Or are schools just trying to keep them safe for football season and then send them back to their dangerous environment?

Sending them back in December will be better, when cases nationally will almost surely be lower.

(08-21-2020 07:09 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 01:06 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population.

What happens after the season is over? Do the athletes continue to remain on campus because it's safer for them? Or are schools just trying to keep them safe for football season and then send them back to their dangerous environment?

At Clemson they tend to stay on campus anyway because it gives them access to the Reeves Center with the dining facilities, P.A.W. Journey, the weight room, etc.

(08-21-2020 07:09 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 01:06 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population.

What happens after the season is over? Do the athletes continue to remain on campus because it's safer for them? Or are schools just trying to keep them safe for football season and then send them back to their dangerous environment?

Is the season ever really over? Furthermore, it's dangerous for everyone. You are acting as though playing football puts them at an increased risk compared to the general population, and I'm saying prove it.

(08-21-2020 09:27 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 07:09 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(08-21-2020 01:06 AM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  @DavidST

This is the thing. Whether or not there is football this virus rages on. I would argue that it is SAFER being apart of a program getting regularly tested than the general student population.

What happens after the season is over? Do the athletes continue to remain on campus because it's safer for them? Or are schools just trying to keep them safe for football season and then send them back to their dangerous environment?

Is the season ever really over? Furthermore, it's dangerous for everyone. You are acting as though playing football puts them at an increased risk compared to the general population, and I'm saying prove it.

LOL, I was thinking the same thing. Unless they are playing college ball in a city in very close proximity to where they grew up, most of the guys aren't getting home that much. The regular season ends for many around NY's, they get a little break but schools starts back up the following week. Then they off to conditioning for Spring Ball and afterwards off season workouts.