The Pac-12 OOC schedule is pretty packed out through the decade. The Big Ten's is relatively sparse. The ACC has ALL of those SEC opponents. So, when could the "Alliance" start?

The Big Ten
Here are the B1G teams with 3 non-Alliance games (with "biggest" opponent listed) on future schedules:

2023: Illinois (@Kansas), Iowa (@ISU), Michigan (host 3G5s), Penn State (v.WVU)
2024: Illinois (v.Kansas), Iowa (v.ISU), Michigan (@Texas), Penn State (@WVU), Wisconsin (v.Alabama)
2025: Iowa (@ISU), Michigan (@Oklahoma), Minnesota (@BYU), Nebraska (@Cincy), Wisconsin(@Alabama)
2026: Nebraska (vs.Tennessee), Penn State (@Temple)

A few near-P4 teams here: Kansas, ISU, WVU, Cincy, Temple, and BYU. Rope an expanded Big 12 into the alliance and you are down to the following:

2023: Michigan (host 3G5s)
2024: Michigan (@Texas), Wisconsin (v.Alabama)
2025: Michigan (@Oklahoma), Wisconsin(@Alabama)
2026: Nebraska (vs.Tennessee)

Nebraska can easily push out the Tennessee game (or a '26 G5) a year or two. Michigan can easily bump a '23 G5. The Wolverines' back-to-back games in the Southwest 'may' be able to be moved with Texas and Oklahoma having to juggle schedule changes of their own. Wisconsin-Alabama? may have to be scrapped... unless the SEC goes to 9 games and the scrapping is mutual. Either way, the Big Ten can start the Alliance in 2023.

The ACC
Similar to the Big Ten, the ACC has more room than I initially anticipated. While the B1G had 15 schedules that could not accommodate an Alliance game, the ACC only has 14. Notre Dame helps alot getting teams to 9. Here are the years ACC teams have 3 non-Alliance FBS opponents, listed:

2023: BC(@Army/v.UConn/v.NIU), FSU(@UF/v.USM/nLSU), GT(@OleM/v.BGU/v.UGA), Miami(v.MiOH/v.TA&M/@Tem)
2024: NCST(v.BYU/@USF/v.LaT), WF(@Army/v.UConn/v.OleM), Clem(v.App/v.USCe/nUGA)
2025: VT(v.ODU/v.Vandy/nUSCe), WF(@OleM/@Lib/v.Army), Clem(@USCe/v.LSU/v.Troy), UNC(v.TCU/@Char/@UCF)
2026: Clem(@LSU/v.USCe/v.GaSo)
2027: none
2028: NCST(@Troy/@ECU/v.Vandy)
2030: NCST(@BYU/@USCe/v.Char)

As expected, Clemson comes out on top with 3 such years; NC State ties, but their later 2 are so far in the future it should be easy to push certain games a year or two later. Clearing the 2025 schedule however would take a lot of doing, cost money, and poison the water for future scheduling.

If the SEC goes to 9 games, and if you count BYU, TCU, and Temple as future Allliance members, the ACC could start in 2024... otherwise it'll be 2026.

The Pac-12
Though smaller than the first two conferences, the Pac-12 has many more conflicting schedules even AFTER counting Big 12 and BYU games as part of the Alliance. I stopped compliling the list; at least 3 teams have scheduling issues (again, counting Big 12/BYU as "alliance") every year through 2026.

The SEC going to 9 games, again, could help. Presuming that happens 2024, at the earliest, the Pac-12 would only have 2 schedules out of compliance (2030 Colorado is far enough out that it could easiliy, and 2025 Cal could simply forgoe scheduling their annual FCS opponent).

Conclusion
It takes at least 2 conferences for an "alliance" to function. The other way the Pac-12 could get the alliance started is by (temporarily) dropping to 8 conference games. Doing so in 2023 would kick-off the alliance with, mostly, B1G-Pac games. After a 4 year cycle, the Pac-12 could expand back to 9 conference games in 2027. The ACC will join the alliance (though their games will count as such upto that point) in 2026.

If the SEC jumps to 9 games the alliance would start for ALL 3 conferences in 2024 and not require the Pac-12 to drop to 8 conference games. Regardless of that, if an expanded Big 12 is NOT counted as Alliance, all 3 conferences will start the alliance together in 2026.

You don't need a formal agreement, just an understanding.

When scheduling ooc games just follow these rules:

Alliance good!
SEC, B12, G5, FCS bad!

After 2024, apparently.

https://insideusc.blog/2021/08/25/usc-to...u-in-2024/

Crayton, NC State and Penn State played most every year from 67 to 82. They would be a good opponent for a neutral site game in DC or Charlotte. For the ACC to actually make money off the deal it has to be neutral site otherwise ESPN already owns it. We are willing to play neutral in Atlanta but never again on a Friday afternoon. We got sucked into that back in 2012 when Tennessee backed out of a home and home and our AD was dumb enough to agree to Atlanta but without a set Labor Day weekend date. Since most NC State fans, and most NC State fans are perfectly aware of what traffic is like on the north side of town, most that would have gone just went to their beach cottages.

For most ACC teams playing neutral site in Vegas is ideal because it is so very easy to get to Vegas. For the P12, I would think they would enjoy Orlando most.

Not sure exactly how the ACC-ESPN look-ins function, but I suppose there is an opportunity there for the ACC to get more money. But, ya, I see the point of neutral-site games as ways to increase revenue. Not sure it outweighs campus revenue.

Still not sure the point of the alliance as it pretains to scheduling. I suppose it is similar to a "10 Power Opponent" mandate across the 3 conferences. Other than that will there be a trophy for best conference or something? As others have said, +1 conference game is likely preferrable for most of these 40 teams, unless they can fish a Clemson or USC into their stadium.

The football scheduling component seems laissez faire for the time being. Probably best to just count the number of P5 v P5 matchups that are newly contracted starting with the announcement of the Alliance.

The current record is 0-1. I’m sure that the USC v LSU contracted game for 2024 has been in the works for some time…but it’s not a good look.

If the PAC moves to an 8 game conference schedule, or the SEC increases its conference slate, then this Alliance scheduling will kickstart.

There will be no "Alliance" once the CFP signs an exclusive contract with ESPN.

I really don't expect the Alliance to have much of an impact on scheduling at all unless the FBS agrees to add a 13th game to the regular season. Scheduling isn't the main thrust of the Alliance.

"If ever".That was such a joke, especially when all of them said that it was "important" for the Big12-4 is needed for an A5. It is an A4 now.

The SEC and ESPiN has to be laughing about this.

(08-26-2021 03:01 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Probably best to just count the number of P5 v P5 matchups that are newly contracted starting with the announcement of the Alliance.

Better to (1) assume there will be a few Alliance non-conference games every year, rather than every single team in the Pac-12, ACC, and Big Ten playing one, and (2) include games that have already been scheduled.

When you look at it that way, this isn't all that difficult.

Wisconsin, for example, already has 6 future games scheduled vs. Pac-12 teams and 4 vs. ACC teams. That's one Pac-12 or ACC opponent on their schedule in 10 of the next 12 seasons after this one.