(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

(01-14-2021 11:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

Take away any economic incentive for Texas and Notre Dame playing an independent schedule and the remaining obstacles to going all in with a superconference would be pride, ego and fear of loss of donor money (with respect to ND). To understand these one must understand the Longhorns and the Domers. There's the reason why those two programs are the hardest to corral (no pun intended). From a Domer's perspective, playing an independent schedule is as much about getting back at programs they blamed for blackballing them way back when, as it is about being seen all over the country. Those feelings don't just go away with more money and playoff access.

I can't predict what they'll do if they really have to make a decision but the speculation will sure make me want to be a fly on the wall.

(01-15-2021 01:43 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

Take away any economic incentive for Texas and Notre Dame playing an independent schedule and the remaining obstacles to going all in with a superconference would be pride, ego and fear of loss of donor money (with respect to ND). To understand these one must understand the Longhorns and the Domers. There's the reason why those two programs are the hardest to corral (no pun intended). From a Domer's perspective, playing an independent schedule is as much about getting back at programs they blamed for blackballing them way back when, as it is about being seen all over the country. Those feelings don't just go away with more money and playoff access.

I can't predict what they'll do if they really have to make a decision but the speculation will sure make me want to be a fly on the wall.

ND makes roughly around $30 million a year in TV/conference payouts.

What do Purdue and Illinois make a year for just being in the Big Ten?

$50 million? $60 million? I really don't know.

There hasn't been an economic incentive for ND to stay independent for quite some time.

(Now, if NBC or CBS gives them a big contract in 2025, that calculus may change again)

Jack Swarbrick has said many times that independence costs ND lots of dollars a year in TV money but they still prefer it over conference membership.

ND knows all of this, was in a conference this year, and is going right back to football independence without much discussion at all. (Covid permitting).

It would have been the easiest thing in the world to just stay in the ACC, but there was no debate or disagreement about what they were going to do.

(01-15-2021 07:41 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(01-15-2021 01:43 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

Take away any economic incentive for Texas and Notre Dame playing an independent schedule and the remaining obstacles to going all in with a superconference would be pride, ego and fear of loss of donor money (with respect to ND). To understand these one must understand the Longhorns and the Domers. There's the reason why those two programs are the hardest to corral (no pun intended). From a Domer's perspective, playing an independent schedule is as much about getting back at programs they blamed for blackballing them way back when, as it is about being seen all over the country. Those feelings don't just go away with more money and playoff access.

I can't predict what they'll do if they really have to make a decision but the speculation will sure make me want to be a fly on the wall.

ND makes roughly around $30 million a year in TV/conference payouts.

What do Purdue and Illinois make a year for just being in the Big Ten?

$50 million? $60 million? I really don't know.

There hasn't been an economic incentive for ND to stay independent for quite some time.

(Now, if NBC or CBS gives them a big contract in 2025, that calculus may change again)

Jack Swarbrick has said many times that independence costs ND lots of dollars a year in TV money but they still prefer it over conference membership.

ND knows all of this, was in a conference this year, and is going right back to football independence without much discussion at all. (Covid permitting).

It would have been the easiest thing in the world to just stay in the ACC, but there was no debate or disagreement about what they were going to do.

The Big 10 earned right at 55 million for 2019. The SEC 46.7 million. The new SEC contract's lowest estimate is 64.2 million for 2024 when it goes into effect. The Big 10 renews in 2023 and a 10% bump on a 6 year old contract takes them to nearly 60 million and if they get 15% to a little over 62 million. Those amounts are 30 million more than is projected for the ACC.

My point Terry D is that ND has no monetary incentive to be a full member of the ACC, but could well find the economic footing extremely tempting if it doubled their media revenue.

(01-15-2021 11:26 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-15-2021 07:41 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(01-15-2021 01:43 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

Take away any economic incentive for Texas and Notre Dame playing an independent schedule and the remaining obstacles to going all in with a superconference would be pride, ego and fear of loss of donor money (with respect to ND). To understand these one must understand the Longhorns and the Domers. There's the reason why those two programs are the hardest to corral (no pun intended). From a Domer's perspective, playing an independent schedule is as much about getting back at programs they blamed for blackballing them way back when, as it is about being seen all over the country. Those feelings don't just go away with more money and playoff access.

I can't predict what they'll do if they really have to make a decision but the speculation will sure make me want to be a fly on the wall.

ND makes roughly around $30 million a year in TV/conference payouts.

What do Purdue and Illinois make a year for just being in the Big Ten?

$50 million? $60 million? I really don't know.

There hasn't been an economic incentive for ND to stay independent for quite some time.

(Now, if NBC or CBS gives them a big contract in 2025, that calculus may change again)

Jack Swarbrick has said many times that independence costs ND lots of dollars a year in TV money but they still prefer it over conference membership.

ND knows all of this, was in a conference this year, and is going right back to football independence without much discussion at all. (Covid permitting).

It would have been the easiest thing in the world to just stay in the ACC, but there was no debate or disagreement about what they were going to do.

The Big 10 earned right at 55 million for 2019. The SEC 46.7 million. The new SEC contract's lowest estimate is 64.2 million for 2024 when it goes into effect. The Big 10 renews in 2023 and a 10% bump on a 6 year old contract takes them to nearly 60 million and if they get 15% to a little over 62 million. Those amounts are 30 million more than is projected for the ACC.

My point Terry D is that ND has no monetary incentive to be a full member of the ACC, but could well find the economic footing extremely tempting if it doubled their media revenue.

That has been the case for some time now, is my point.

The poster I was responding to seemed to indicate this was a future thing, not a current and past thing.

The old NBC deal prior to 2015 paid ND $15 million. The SEC and Big Ten payouts were much larger than that in say, 2012, when ND joined the ACC.

They still are independent. Maxing out that possible payout has not been ND's top priority.

If one or two ACC currently playing p-5 football, dropped that football program, the ACC could make a great deal of extra money. But it has to be the correct two.

(01-14-2021 11:18 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 11:06 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 06:25 PM)texoma Wrote:  The PAC?? I am talking about Texas going Indy in football and leaving their other sports in the Big12 with a Notre Dame/ACC type arrangement.

Yeah, but they were originally talking about the economics of Texas to the PAC.

I do agree though that a partial deal with the Big 12 could be workable.

ATU, none of this is workable to any conference and may not be workable any longer for the Irish either. Let's say there is consolidation by 4 or 5 teams after NIL becomes law. As you have mentioned the new bargaining chip for revenue increase is going to be more conference games. Just who is it that Texas and Notre Dame will be able to find that will give them a home and home at the expense of perhaps one of only 2 games left at their AD's discretion? Nobody worth playing that's who. And handling their minor sports without the profit of having them isn't going to appeal to any of the remaining P4, because if Oklahoma leaves and Texas seeks a partial the remaining Big 12 is going to take a major hair cut in revenue. So we are talking a P4. With a P4 you are also talking a champs only potential or at least a champs in first 8 team playoff. Either way will the Ohio State's, Alabama's and Clemson's of the world really be hot to play the Irish or Horns when it could cost them a slot just to make it easier for them to grab an at large? Hell no!

So all of this partial crap goes out the window with (1) any realignment out of the Big 12 or (2) any contract revenue enhancement that moves to 10 conference games.

More conference games, but also more games from new members.

Let's say the Big 12 more or less becomes defunct within a few years. The clear value is in Texas and Oklahoma. Their addition would make any league stronger, especially if you add a few more games...the SEC going from 8 to 10 for example.

Currently the 14 team SEC places 56 games on the market. The 10 team Big 12 places 45 on the airwaves. Now obviously the average value for those games is lower, but the number of games still represents a significant hole in the marketplace if we simply removed all or most of them.

If you added Texas and Oklahoma to the SEC and simultaneously moved to 10 games then you get 80 games available for TV. A nice boost, but only a 24 game difference over the current total. If you went to 18 schools and played 10 games then you've got 90 available. If you went to 20 then you've got 100 available.

What's strange is this...add the current 56 game total for the SEC and the current 45 game total for the Big 12 and you arrive at 101 games that TV networks have at their disposal. While the average value for the Big 12 games is less, it still represents a valuable commodity in the marketplace especially considering how many times they can tap TX in a given season. I also consider West Virginia's exposure pretty solid because they tap markets like Pittsburgh and DC.

I digress, but the point is that if the SEC added 6 schools from the Big 12 and also bumped up their current conference game total then they have effectively assumed the entire value of the Big 12 contract. It's fuzzy math on my part, but the primary reason this is the case comes down to the average value of the new games. Texas and Oklahoma add the most per game, but 4 more halfway decent draws included and you have also raised the average value of what those Big 12 games previously represented when the same schools were playing each other in the Big 12. The reason is because most of the new games involve larger market SEC squads as opposed to the more limited audience of the average Big 12 school. If Vanderbilt gets dropped in the process due to NIL concerns then the equation bumps up a little further even if you took a decent G5 member.

If you added the current Big 12 value to the current SEC value then what do you have? A pretty nice contract and it's split up between 20 schools instead of 24.

Now a counterargument could be made along the lines that the new SEC contract ups the average to where this math would no longer consider all factors and thus be invalid. Nonetheless, the entire value of the Big 12 contract is nothing to sneeze at. Pitting those schools(assuming the 6 strongest draws) against SEC schools only enhances the average regardless of which set of numbers we're working with. I think the equation holds true either way.

(01-15-2021 04:34 PM)Statefan Wrote:  If one or two ACC currently playing p-5 football, dropped that football program, the ACC could make a great deal of extra money. But it has to be the correct two.

This is what is meant by consolidation and NIL might help that happen. Look at all of the current P5 and drop the last two revenue earners from each conference and here is what you would be looking at: (Brackets represent national position in earnings)

ACC: Wake Forest (65) and Georgia Tech (63)
PAC: Washington State (66) and Oregon State (61)
Big 12: Iowa State (62) and Texas Tech (56)
Big 10: Rutgers (59) and Illinois (45)
SEC: Vanderbilt (57) and Missouri (51)

But wait that's not quite fair is it. Boston College (60) should depart before schools in the 50's, right? And Vanderbilt is ranked higher than Virginia Tech so strike another ACC school. Now add Texas Tech and you have the bottom 10.

So, the SEC loses only one, Vanderbilt.
The Big 10 loses only one, Rutgers.
The Big 12 does lose Iowa State and Texas Tech
The PAC does lose Washington State and Oregon State
And, the ACC loses four: Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, Boston College and Virginia Tech.
But 55 is an odd number so Kansas State is out too. What about the next 6 to get to 48? So Oklahoma State is next out followed by N.C. State, followed by Utah, and Missouri, then California, and finally Ole Miss.

Now we have 48 schools which can be divided into 4 conferences of 12 much more profitably:

PAC 12 needs to add 4
Arizona, Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Colorado, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Big 10 is at 13 and needs to lose one: Illinois needs to move.
Indiana, Maryland, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

SEC needs to add 1:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi State, Texas A&M

ACC needs 2 and Notre Dame is joining in full:
Notre Dame Louisville, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia
Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina

So the Big 12 is now the Big 6;
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Baylor to the PAC
T.C.U. to the SEC.
West Virginia to the ACC with Illinois.

So we wind up with this P4:
Big 10:
Indiana, Maryland, Northwestern, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue
Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin

SEC:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi State, T.C.U., Texas A&M

PAC 12:
Arizona, Baylor, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas
Arizona State, California Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

ACC:
Illinois, Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia
Clemson, Duke, Florida State, Miami, North Carolina, Virginia

So, while I'm sure dropping schools would make us all wealthier, be careful what you wish for. Now if we stayed with 14 member conferences with a total of 56 then Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, Boston College and Virginia Tech would be gone from the ACC.
Oregon State and Washington State from the PAC.
Vanderbilt from the SEC.
Rutgers from the Big 10
Iowa State from the Big 12.

And that might affect realignment too:

PAC is at 10 and needs 4: Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas State, Oklahoma State
Big 10 is at 13 and needs 1: Kansas
SEC is at 13 and needs 1: Oklahoma
ACC is at 11 and needs 3: Baylor, West Virginia, T.C.U.

That leaves a lot to be desired as well. I think I like 48 better.

Taking out the lowest earners is an eye opener isn't it?

I'm not completely sold on the idea that future changes in compensation of athletes will result in the creation of a small elite group of wealthy schools for whom football is the be all and end all of conference alignment decisions. I'm not even sold on the idea that the P5 would consolidate into a P4 with no new members in the clique. I could see, and would welcome, a new division considerably smaller than the current FBS but larger than the current P5. But there are contractual obligations and geographical considerations that complicate realignment that may not be solvable without major changes in the P5 conferences.

In tinkering with possible realignment scenarios, I tried to imagine what might happen if the ACC would solve its long-term media problem (that is, the problem is that it's too long term) by voting to dissolve the conference and void its GoR. Also, what might happen if the PAC decided the only way to fix its structural financial problems largely of their own making through poor decisions was to also dissolve.

I imagined (fantasized might be a better word for it) an 81 school upper division, with four conferences -- three of them with 18 teams each and a fourth with 27 teams. These wouldn't all be equals in terms of their revenue generating ability. The B1G+ and the SEC+ will always be the Big Dogs, and will be richer than anybody else. But instead of the ACC and PAC poaching whatever is left after the Big Dogs eat, I imagined a new conference emerging -- the Coastal Athletic Conference -- with a nine team Pacific Division and a nine team Atlantic Division.

The 27 team conference would consist of a conglomeration of teams left over from the ACC, PAC, Big 12, AAC and MWC plus indy BYU. That conference would technically be built from the shell of the remnants of the Big 12, and would buy the name American Athletic Conference from its current owner.

This is what it would look like when all the dust settles (teams are listed in order of their 10 year average Sagarin power rating).

SEC West: LSU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Ole Miss, Arkansas and Texas Tech

SEC East: Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky and Vanderbilt.


B1G West: Wisconsin, Michigan State, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern, Minnesota, Colorado, Purdue and Illinois.

B1G East: Ohio State, Notre Dame, Michigan, Penn State, Virginia Tech, NC State, Indiana, Maryland and Rutgers.


Coastal Pacific: Oregon, Stanford, Washington, Southern Cal, Utah, Arizona State, UCLA, Arizona and California.

Coastal Atlantic: Clemson, Florida State, Miami, Louisville, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia and Wake Forest.


American West: Boise St, BYU, Washington St, San Diego St, Utah St, Oregon St, Air Force, Nevada and Colorado St.

American Central: TCU, Kansas State, Baylor, Iowa State, Houston, Navy, SMU, Army and Kansas.

American East: West Virginia, Pitt, UCF, Cincinnati, Boston College, Syracuse, Temple, Memphis and USF.


The 2019 Sagarin ratings for these four conferences would have been:

SEC 81
B1G 77
CAC 76
AAC 72

By contrast, no other conferences made up of the 49 schools left out would have a Sagarin rating higher than 60.

The two division conferences would stage a four team conference championship consisting of the top two teams in each division based solely on their division round robin record. The three division AAC would have a four team championship consisting of the three division winners plus the highest ranked non-champion based on the Massey Composite ratings.

The four conference champions would play semifinals in Atlanta and Dallas (Jerry World and Mercedes Center). The nine losing teams from the SEC, B1G and CAC tournaments and the losing finalist from the AAC would all be assigned by a committee to one of the NY5 bowls: Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Capital One. The championship finals would rotate among these five warm weather tourist destination sites.

That's my fantasy solution.

I certainly think your SEC plan is reasonable.

I don't like your Big Ten plan. Of course with Oklahoma and Texas off the board we would target Notre Dame first. You can guess how I feel about Colorado. As for the Big Ten heading East, in the past Virginia and North Carolina have been rumored much more as Big Ten targets than Virginia Tech and NC State. Virginia Tech and NC State certainly are stronger football schools but if you think the Big Ten is football minded and the Big Ten is going for Colorado which is way far away from the power of the Big Ten (Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State), why not give the Big Ten Clemson and Florida State? If you're sticking us with Colorado you don't care about geography.

And clearly you don't care about geography if you're considering a "Coastal Atlantic Conference". If the "ACC" loses Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, and NC State, you are saying that the southern ACC schools would rather ditch the northern ACC schools and play 2-3 games a year vs. West Coast teams than stick with Pitt, Syracuse, and Boston College? I'm not buying it. If the ACC really did lose ND. NCSt, and VaT, I'd see them either standing pat at 12 or adding some AAC teams (Cincinnati, Temple, West Virginia, maybe even UCF/USF if they ever lost FSU and/or Mia) then agree to a conference with teams in the West Coast (especially if they have to "kick out" teams to do so).

(01-18-2021 08:55 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I certainly think your SEC plan is reasonable.

I don't like your Big Ten plan. Of course with Oklahoma and Texas off the board we would target Notre Dame first. You can guess how I feel about Colorado. As for the Big Ten heading East, in the past Virginia and North Carolina have been rumored much more as Big Ten targets than Virginia Tech and NC State. Virginia Tech and NC State certainly are stronger football schools but if you think the Big Ten is football minded and the Big Ten is going for Colorado which is way far away from the power of the Big Ten (Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State), why not give the Big Ten Clemson and Florida State? If you're sticking us with Colorado you don't care about geography.

And clearly you don't care about geography if you're considering a "Coastal Atlantic Conference". If the "ACC" loses Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, and NC State, you are saying that the southern ACC schools would rather ditch the northern ACC schools and play 2-3 games a year vs. West Coast teams than stick with Pitt, Syracuse, and Boston College? I'm not buying it. If the ACC really did lose ND. NCSt, and VaT, I'd see them either standing pat at 12 or adding some AAC teams (Cincinnati, Temple, West Virginia, maybe even UCF/USF if they ever lost FSU and/or Mia) then agree to a conference with teams in the West Coast (especially if they have to "kick out" teams to do so).

My reason for putting Colorado in the B1G was to provide a home for one of the PAC schools whose vote would be needed to dissolve that conference. I put Va Tech and NC State in the B1G because I didn't think that UNC, Duke or Virginia would leave each other or their ACC mates.

I wouldn't expect any of the two Coastal divisions to play any games against each other. I would expect most of their OOC schedule to consist of traditional rivals and regional opponents . Those would include Notre Dame's games against USC and Stanford and Atlantic Division games against SEC East teams. They would already have a balanced 8 game schedule with their division round robin. For that matter, I would expect that any cross division games in all conferences to be purely voluntary based on mutual interest by the teams.

But let's not forget that this is all fantasy, and would require a degree of cooperation among conferences that would never exist in the real world.

If hypothetically the Big 12 gets absorbed some how into the new P4, I could them setting up something like this

Rose Bowl (non playoff years)
Big Ten vs PAC

Sugar (non playoff years)
SEC vs highest ranked at-large from ACC, Big Ten, ND

ORANGE (non playoff years)
ACC vs. Highest ranked At-large from SEC, Big Ten, ND

Cotton, Fiesta, Peach. (Non playoff years)
At-large vs At-large

(01-15-2021 04:34 PM)Statefan Wrote:  If one or two ACC currently playing p-5 football, dropped that football program, the ACC could make a great deal of extra money. But it has to be the correct two.

Extra money, yes. But not close to B1G or SEC levels.
The question then becomes: is it better to move back toward your roots or continue to try to be competitive.
Clemson with Dabo has shown that a smaller dollar school can be successful on the big stage. But how many Dabos are there and how long can you keep them down on the farm?

(01-19-2021 06:16 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(01-15-2021 04:34 PM)Statefan Wrote:  If one or two ACC currently playing p-5 football, dropped that football program, the ACC could make a great deal of extra money. But it has to be the correct two.

Extra money, yes. But not close to B1G or SEC levels.
The question then becomes: is it better to move back toward your roots or continue to try to be competitive.
Clemson with Dabo has shown that a smaller dollar school can be successful on the big stage. But how many Dabos are there and how long can you keep them down on the farm?

Yes. The ACC can either emphasize football or men's basketball. In football, they have a hard time catching up with the SEC and Big Ten. If Texas ever gets their act together and the two pledge their loyalty to the Big 12, the ACC will be #4 in football (assuming FSU and Miami stay irrelevant). But in basketball they are pretty much the #1 conference. Duke and North Carolina in basketball are way bigger than Clemson is in football (Clemson has had more recent success but they are overshadowed by Alabama and even Ohio State, Clemson's a better program but Ohio State's way more popular). Last season, Duke-North Carolina was the most watched men's basketball game of the season even though North Carolina had a losing record and the game aired on ESPN, beating games airing on CBS and FOX. The other game finished 6th overall. The only way Clemson can get a game in the top 10 regular season is if they play Notre Dame or another similarly popular team.

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2020/03...-espn-btn/

Yes, football is the #1 sport by a mile but men's basketball isn't insignificant and there's money to be made in it as well. No conference should be emphasizing wrestling. But if you can't beat the SEC in football, beat them in men's basketball. Be in basketball what the SEC is in football.

You could start with the following Big 24

East - Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, MD, VT, NC State
Lakes - Michigan, MSU, ND, Purdue, Indiana, NW
North - Min, Whisky, Iowa, Illinois, Nebraska, Colorado
Pacific - Washington, Oregon, Cal, USC, Stanford, UCLA

They could play 5 - 3 - 2 - Your division, three or two permanent rivals, and three or two rotating games.

ND would have something like Michigan, MSU. Purdue, Indiana, NW, Stanford and USC every year. 3 rotate out of the remaining 16.
NC State would something like Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, MD, VT, Purdue, and UCLA

Using last year as an example you would have Notre Dame and Ohio State hosting Wisky and Oregon in semifinals.

The New Southern Conference could be:
Atlantic - UVa, VT, UNC, WF, SC, Clemson, Miami
South - FSU, Florida, Auburn, Georgia, Vandy, Kentucky, Pitt
Gulf - Bama, TN, Ole Miss, MSU, LSU, Ark, Louisville
West - TAMU, Texas, TT, OU, Mizzou, OSU, Kansas

They could play a 6-1 and rotate 2.

Using last year as an example Clemson and Alabama would have hosted TAMU and Florida.

That's an 8 school playoff to replace the dying bowls.

Without discrete divisions of 5-6-7 to win, it's become boring.

^Virginia Tech is listed in both groups. I'm going to be generous and assume you meant Georgia Tech in the second group.