Conference Realignment Thread

[Infield Infidel]

You -- and a lot of other people -- are, so, so wrong about this.

The truth is that every school in the country is free to exploit their TV and/or media rights exclusively for their own benefit. To use your example, Bama makes much, much more money off TV than Miss St.

As of earlier in the year, Bama's third tier rights bring in an additional $8.4M+/yr and Florida's at $7.4M+/yr. I've read recently that Florida will be upped to $10M/yr but I can't seem to verify that anywhere. Miss St doesn't have a deal. Their third tier revenue is $0. The Bama and Florida third tier deals dwarf what, for instance, Iowa St would be taking in if 1st / 2nd tier revenue was distributed equally in the Big 12.

I agree, teams can go for third-tier or new media monies however they wish. But I wasn't talking about third tier rights, which teams negotiate on their own. I was talking about first-tier rights. B1G splits the BTN, ESPN and ABC money evenly. SEC splits CBS and ESPN money evenly. Big East Football splits football money evenly. ACC split is even as well. Pac-12 doesn't split it evenly, so I'll give you that one.

That Bama and Florida make shit-tons in third-tier deals means they don't need more money than the other SEC teams from the CBS and ESPN deals. They already get more, so teams like Vandy and Miss. St can survive off of first-tier money. They recognize that without Vandy, Kentucky and Miss St, they don't have a conference, and they don't have brains to beat in on the field
Texas has cash cows in the LHN and merchandising, so they don't at all need more money from the ESPN deal. But unlike Bama and Florida, Texas wants more money from their first tier deal as well. It's like saying "hey, since we have a large competitive advantage, we deserve other competitive advantages" Iowa St doesn't deserve more disadvantages. Look, you don't need to apologize for being greedy. Just recognize that you are.

 

[WestMassExpat]

Yeah, this is speeding up big time. Wouldn't be surprised if this is settled in principle very soon.

But it's the "in principle" part that is concerning. The issue of the Texas legislature getting involved has yet to raise its ugly head. There is no way this goes down without the lege getting involved, and that could cause real problems. I guess it's wait and see for now.

I still think the Texas Lege won't be an issue if Texas leaves the Big 12. 1) A&M already broke the circle so lawmakers getting involved would be a blatant double-standard; 2) Perry isn't going to get involved and he'd be the one who would have to call a special legislative session since they're not scheduled to reconvene until 2013. The only thing the lege could do on its own is have some committee chairman call an out-of-session meeting and do a lot of finger wagging.

 

[Kremlin Watcher]

I still think the Texas Lege won't be an issue if Texas leaves the Big 12. 1) A&M already broke the circle so lawmakers getting involved would be a blatant double-standard; 2) Perry isn't going to get involved and he'd be the one who would have to call a special legislative session since they're not scheduled to reconvene until 2013. The only thing the lege could do on its own is have some committee chairman call an out-of-session meeting and do a lot of finger wagging.

Not an expert at all on the workings of the Texas lege (haven't lived in state for many years). But as far as I am aware, the lege has certain powers specifically related to funding that they can use out of session to cause problems. But to be clear - I don't have any actual information on this issue. I am speculating based on recent history and the stick that people like Bullock and Richards used during the last realignment boondoggle. Hard to believe that Baylor will let this go down without a fight.

 

[Infield Infidel]

Texas needs to be in a conference with big state schools with first-class academics and huge athletic programs. To me that means either the PAC or the B1G. Both those conferences would take Texas and OU in a heartbeat. I guess it depends on what else is part of that deal, both in terms of other schools and the various TV contracts.

To fulfill the bolded, Would Texas want to go to the SEC? Would the SEC want them? To me it seems a match but I'm not on top of any cultural differences that would arise.

 

[Kremlin Watcher]

To fulfill the bolded, Would Texas want to go to the SEC? Would the SEC want them? To me it seems a match but I'm not on top of any cultural differences that would arise.

The conventional wisdom is that Texas will not go to the SEC due to the SEC's academic standards. Texas has put a HUGE priority on academic standards, and the view is that too many SEC schools shoot too low on academics. Ergo, low odds for Texas to the SEC. I don't have any actual knowledge of this, but this is the standard view in Texas.

 

[Sea Dog]

As far as I can tell, this is the first on-the-record comment by someone in the Pac-12 that questions something, anything that has to do with the conference's expansion. Sounds like maybe the Arizona schools might have some concerns about having far less exposure in California. I'm guessing Colorado and Utah might share the same concerns, even if they are newcomers, because the current conference structure puts them in the same division as USC and UCLA.

From an Arizona Daily Star reporter during the Wildcats' game tonight ...

@patrickfinley, #Arizonawildcats AD Greg Byrne could see #Pac12 expanding fairly soon, but "got a really good conference" as is. In "position of strength"

@patrickfinley, Any #Pac12 expansion that would leave #Arizonawildcats in an eastern division "a big concern for me," Byrne said

 

[Kremlin Watcher]

It's moving to ludicrous speed. Quoted from a thread in an OU board:

Have reached an agreement in principal with the Pac12. They will begin the steps necessary to leave the Big12 next week. They will go without Tx and Tech if necessary. I have no information regarding Tech and Texas and if Tech's offer is contingent on Texas. I have heard that the horns are in a little bit of shock at OU's perceived sudden change of heart to not sit back and blindly follow Texas. Beebe and Dodd forgot that David Boren has an ego. Absent some u foreseen event this is a done deal as far as the Okla schools.

Should be an interesting week.

 

[Kremlin Watcher]

Yeah, they've gone into plaid:

Sources: Texas being told to slow things down
Chip Brown
Orangebloods.com Columnist

Legislators and statewide office holders have swung into high-pressure mode to get Texas president Bill Powers and athletic director DeLoss Dodds to slow down any decision that might involve the Longhorns joining the Pac-12, multiple sources said Sunday.

With reports surfacing that Oklahoma is all but ready to commit to the Pac-12, Texas lawmakers are so concerned about the Longhorns possibly following suit that a full-court press is being made to slow things down by elected officials and corporate CEOs with influence, sources said.

"We don't want any hasty decision being made that hasn't been well thought out," one lawmaker told Orangebloods.com on Sunday.

Sources said the reason lawmakers are hot is that they received assurances from the Big 12, including Powers, that the Big 12 would survive without Texas A&M.

And because of those assurances, lawmakers did not take an aggressive stand against Texas A&M withdrawing from the Big 12. But that may be changing.

Sources said members of the Legislature are or will be reaching out to Texas A&M president R. Bowen Loftin to tell him the Aggies may no longer have the blessing of lawmakers to leave the Big 12, especially if it looks like the Big 12 will collapse.

According to sources close to Texas A&M, there is expected to be more movement involving the Aggies and the Southeastern Conference Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.

Sources say statewide office holders such as lieutenant governor David Dewhurst and Texas House Speaker Joe Straus haven't been active on realignment up to this point but now are getting involved.

A source in the Big 12 says there is also an increasing likelihood of litigation against the Southeastern Conference as well as the Pac-12 if the Big 12 comes apart.

In other words, it's about to get messy.

 

[Clears Cleaver]

Yeah, they've gone into plaid:

always nice to get a Spaceballs quote in there...

If OU goes, Texas has no choice but to follow. There is nothing left for them and no school they can recruit in that is worthwhile. And, by allowing A&M into the SEC and OU into the Pac 12 (and TCU into the Big East), you have four different local schools who can tell Texas kids that claim they are only school in their conference can get them to BCS title game. This may hurt Texas recruiting as much as the LN might help it.

Texas to Pac 12 seems inevitable. Its much more attractive than alternative of saving the scraps of the big 12. Boone pickens wants to Add TCU. Really, that doesn't do much for the conference or for TCU i think. what a mess

 

[Sea Dog]

Baylor: Irony or hypocrisy, you decide.

Very curious to see if Oklahoma and Oklahoma State head to the Pac-12 as soon as today. This has been a bizarre 15 months in the Big 12, and there needs to be some resolution soon, it's a shame there's going to be so much uncertainty is so many places throughout the football season.

Also, Chip Brown reported so many things today. Texas "turned down" the Pac-12 and opened talks with the ACC. Then Texas, Syracuse, UConn and Rutgers to the ACC. Then Texas in "intense" discussions trying to keep the Sooners in the Big 12. This after Pitt, West Virginia, Louisville and Rutgers to the Big 12 last week. He might have been DeLoss Dodds' mouthpiece last year and got a lot of stuff right with that inside info, but his posts have been a mess the last two weeks.

Then again, so is conference realignment on the whole, so I suppose that much is consistent.

EDIT -- According to Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury via Twitter: "Sources: Pac-12 probably would take the Oklahoma schools even if Texas is off the table. More on realignment on the Hotline in the a.m."

I'm beginning to wonder if this goes down like it did last summer, when Colorado accepted an invite as the 11th team before the Texas Legislature could organize on Baylor's behalf. In this instance, they could invite KU as the 15th team, tell Texas they're the 16th if they want it. If not, they're moving on to Mizzou or Texas Tech to reach 16 and they're done. Two summers in a row you've had your chance, we're done dealing with you. Would certainly put Texas into a corner there.

 

[Kremlin Watcher]

Yeah it's a complete mess right now. I've read so many conflicting reports about who is going where and why that it just doesn't make sense right now. Everyone in the Big 12 is scrambling right now and, I imagine, calling in every favor they can to try to tip the situation in their favor. Everyone seems to think this is the realignment apocalypse that will settle things once and for all, so they're all pulling out all the stops to make sure they end up where they want. Getting very messy and no one knows right now how it will shake out. I think Texas has made some mistakes here and may end up not getting what they want.

 

[axx]

The ACC doesn't seem like a bad option for Texas, esp if the ACC is willing to let them do what they want with the LHN. Take Texas Tech with them, and 2 Big East schools. The Pac Whatever gets instead the two Oklahoma schools along with Mizzou and Kansas.

 

[TomRicardo]

Well the ACC needs to do something with Florida St. talking to the SEC and UMiami pretty much the walking dead.

 

[Hendu's Gait]

If you have the ACC 16 team superleague, I envision these divisions, no more of that "atlantic/coastal" garbage:

North:
BC
Syracuse
Rutgers
Uconn
VTech
UVA
Maryland
Miami


South:
Duke
UNC
NC State
Wake
Texas
FSU
Clemson
Georgia Tech

You would have to split either Ga tech or Miami or Maryland from their neighbors unfortunately, to get 8 and 8 (unless you put Texas up north), but if you go above, you keep the old Big East rivalries in the North, and keep the NC schools together. Va Tech may dominate though.

Texas gets to go to a conference with 2 of its public academic rivals (UNC/UVA) if this were to happen.

edit: and if FSU leaves and Miami gets kicked out (or worse, SMU'd), you can try to replace Miami with WV (would make for great rivalry games, assuming SEC doesn't take them too) and FSU with USF or UCF.

 

[WestMassExpat]

The wildly shifting rumors/threats from state of Texas powerbrokers, threats of litigation, pleads to slow down, and the like are exactly the tools these folks have to try and fight Texas from leaving the Big 12. If they had a stronger hand they already would've played it by now. Lt. Governor Dewhurst or the speaker of the Texas house can saber-rattle all they want but but the final balance sheet argues against Texas clinging to a dying conference to protect the interest of a private, Baptist university. If Texas leaves the Big 12, it will be because their interests are significantly improved, and if Tech follows in this arrangement then theirs would be bumped up exponentially.

If Oklahoma breaks the circle first, that gives UT plausible deniability and the extra leverage they need to ensure the state doesn't get involved ("we're forced into finding a new home.")

Also, Texas would go to the Big 10 before the ACC. UT to the ACC makes far less geographical sense than an eastern Pac-12 division, and if they're going to go that route they'd rather be affiliated with the Big 10, I think, assuming it's still an option. They'd be a damn good partner to lure Notre Dame.

 

[TomRicardo]

Why would Big East teams leave for an ACC w/o Florida St and UMiami? Honest question. Big East would end getting more money than that Zombie of a League. It would just be Big 12 v 2.0 just waiting for the Big 10+ and SEC to cannablize the last remaining appealing pieces.

If I am Rutgers or Pittsburgh I rather sit in the decaying Big East and wait for my Big 10+ invite.

I don't think either the ACC or the Big East survive. They will probably cobble together a league from the corpse of both of them. No way the current frame of the ACC can continue while Big East just does not have big time schools. The bastard child of both might do well.

 

[Royal Reader]

Just thinking out loud here: if the OK schools were to go west, could Texas take some of its current Conference partners to the Big East, with the football and basketball schools then splitting? Say- Texas, Mizzou, KU, and one of Tech/Baylor, leaving K-State, Iowa St and the other Texas school to try to work something out with a mid-major? Would the academics be a problem for UT, being with the likes of WVU and Cincinnati? Would Texas simply be too big a fish? That would give you a football league of:

WEST

Texas
Louisville
TCU
Baylor/Tech
Mizzou
KU

EAST

Syracuse
West Virginia
Pitt
UConn
USF
Rutgers

Cincy could go in either division, though it would probably work out best for them to go East and then have the western teams make it up by playing Notre Dame (or a mid-major OOC date for the lesser names)?

 

[gopats84]

Just thinking out loud here: if the OK schools were to go west, could Texas take some of its current Conference partners to the Big East, with the football and basketball schools then splitting? Say- Texas, Mizzou, KU, and one of Tech/Baylor, leaving K-State, Iowa St and the other Texas school to try to work something out with a mid-major? Would the academics be a problem for UT, being with the likes of WVU and Cincinnati? Would Texas simply be too big a fish? That would give you a football league of:

WEST

Texas
Louisville
TCU
Baylor/Tech
Mizzou
KU

EAST

Syracuse
West Virginia
Pitt
UConn
USF
Rutgers

Cincy could go in either division, though it would probably work out best for them to go East and then have the western teams make it up by playing Notre Dame (or a mid-major OOC date for the lesser names)?

The problem I see is if the new world order of college football is going to be four conferences of 16 teams, that creates a total of 64 places in the superconferences. With 66 current BCS teams plus TCU, Notre Dame and Boise State, that leaves 69 schools for 64 seats at the grown-up table so to speak with five schools relegated to mid-major or independent status.

If schools in the ACC, Big East and Big 12, presumably the three conferences that are going to be pilaged in the race to 4X16, mash together into one or more leagues of fewer than 16 schools, they run the risk of being hit again during the next cycle of conference merry-go-round.

I really think the superconference era of 4X16 is coming, and its best to solidfy your place in one of these 16-team leagues than cobble something else together. That way you know you're not one of the 5 plus schools that doesn't have a place when the music stops.

 

[Clears Cleaver]

Isn't there the risk of a major lawsuit if you are in a BCS-conference and end up not in one after realignment? basically destroying a schools atheltic department, cash flow and perceived image?

 

[TomRicardo]

The BCS rules say the top 6 conferences and Notre Dame are under the automatic qualifying rules. If the Big 12 no longer exists then MWC becomes an automatic qualifying conference. If the Big East or ACC go then Conference USA becomes an automatic qualifying conference.

The system is set up for six automatic bid conferences and Notre Dame.

 

[TomRicardo]

All 11 Bowl Championship conferences are BCS conferences. The top 6 are considered automatic qualifiers.

As of now the ACC could actually to lose its AQ status. It probably not help this year as the conference once again is VTech and bunch of chumps. (Assuming FSU jumps)

 

[kenneycb]

Why would Big East teams leave for an ACC w/o Florida St and UMiami? Honest question. Big East would end getting more money than that Zombie of a League. It would just be Big 12 v 2.0 just waiting for the Big 10+ and SEC to cannablize the last remaining appealing pieces.

Not if the TV deal is voided and reworked.

 

[axx]

The BCS rules say the top 6 conferences and Notre Dame are under the automatic qualifying rules. If the Big 12 no longer exists then MWC becomes an automatic qualifying conference. If the Big East or ACC go then Conference USA becomes an automatic qualifying conference.

The system is set up for six automatic bid conferences and Notre Dame.

They would change the rules obviously. I would love it if the superconferences split and formed a "Division 0" or something similar. No more non-conference games against crappy Sun Belt teams! They could also do the playoff then, with the four winners of the conferences.

Isn't there the risk of a major lawsuit if you are in a BCS-conference and end up not in one after realignment? basically destroying a schools atheltic department, cash flow and perceived image?

This is definitely going to happen; but on what grounds?

 

[RingoOSU]

Yeah, I think the BCS deal as we know it dies soon after the big 12 does.

 

[ethangl]

I agree, teams can go for third-tier or new media monies however they wish. But I wasn't talking about third tier rights, which teams negotiate on their own. I was talking about first-tier rights.

Why the distinction? The viability of the conference, and trustiness, and all that, is just as necessary for the 3rd tier/media deals as it is for the 1st/2nd tier deals as they are of course all predicated on coverage of the same competition. This is a binary issue. Either you believe that every single cent generated by these athletic programs should be split up equally, or you don't. Making caveats for these deals over here but not those deals over there is just playing a shell game.

But unlike Bama and Florida, Texas wants more money from their first tier deal as well. It's like saying "hey, since we have a large competitive advantage, we deserve other competitive advantages" Iowa St doesn't deserve more disadvantages. Look, you don't need to apologize for being greedy. Just recognize that you are.

Don't try to play the competitive advantage card. If Texas was truly trying to use the 1st/2nd tier deal to gain a competitive advantage, we'd do so against the one program we are actually competing against (last year aside, sheesh) -- do you know who made/makes the most money from Big 12's 1st/2nd tier deals? I'll give you a hint -- it's not Texas.

The idea that UT is just trying to stick it to A&M or ISU is just completely absurd. If this was about competition, would we have offered half the network to A&M? No. But that deal got turned down and now we're being told it's all so unfair. Okay. You know why A&M only receives a third of the Permanent University Fund? It's because they got to pick first.

Ultimately this money is being funneled back into academics -- the reason the university exists, and all that. Universities have a responsibility to maximize its resources in this regard, so if Texas is being greedy, well, everybody should be greedy. You don't finance research, build facilities, hire faculty, create scholarships, etc, etc on good feelings and harmony.

 

[TomRicardo]

Yeah, I think the BCS deal as we know it dies soon after the big 12 does.

Why? The deal right now is signed through 2014 with rules in place in case a conference dies. The BCS will probably die after 2014 however I doubt the major conferences will ever be able to pull what they did with the first BCS agreement.

What people seem to be missing is the BCS is an agreement between every Division I Bowl Championship school. The BCS got its hand forced to sign everyone.

 

[TomRicardo]

They would change the rules obviously. I would love it if the superconferences split and formed a "Division 0" or something similar. No more non-conference games against crappy Sun Belt teams! They could also do the playoff then, with the four winners of the conferences.

This is definitely going to happen; but on what grounds?

This will not happen. Fact is you start cutting state programs that qualified before and you are going to face a pissed off Congress. This is why the BCS was worked again a couple of years ago to include all 11 conferences, Army, Navy, and Notre Dame (Boise St. is in it too).

The only thing the NCAA is truly fearful of is a pissed off Congress.

 

[RedOctober3829]

If they go to 4 16-team conferences, the door opens up for a 16-team playoff. Take the top 4 teams in each conference and start it the first weekend of December.

 

[TomRicardo]

If they go to 4 16-team conferences, the door opens up for a 16-team playoff. Take the top 4 teams in each conference and start it the first weekend of December.

This also will not happen

 

[Royal Reader]

The problem I see is if the new world order of college football is going to be four conferences of 16 teams, that creates a total of 64 places in the superconferences. With 66 current BCS teams plus TCU, Notre Dame and Boise State, that leaves 69 schools for 64 seats at the grown-up table so to speak with five schools relegated to mid-major or independent status.

If schools in the ACC, Big East and Big 12, presumably the three conferences that are going to be pilaged in the race to 4X16, mash together into one or more leagues of fewer than 16 schools, they run the risk of being hit again during the next cycle of conference merry-go-round.

I really think the superconference era of 4X16 is coming, and its best to solidfy your place in one of these 16-team leagues than cobble something else together. That way you know you're not one of the 5 plus schools that doesn't have a place when the music stops.

This is the thing though... why would we assume it's going to be the ACC and not the Big East that survives? The SEC seems MUCH more likely to raid the ACC than the BE. Wouldn't that Big XII/Big East hybrid look like a stronger conference than an ACC which just got raided? They could then add Notre Dame and two ACC schools to complete the Superconference. Texas is going to be fine either way - any superconference would want them - so it's perhaps a question of them picking the schools they want to be with out of the remaining B12/ACC/East schools that don't get invited to the SEC, if they choose not to go West with the Sooners.

The other thing about sixteen team superconferences, is how would it work schedule wise? Would there be room for OOC games? Divisions of eight with two OOC and three against the other division of your own conference?

 

[TomRicardo]

Word now is Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri talking to Big East.

West - Kansas, KSU, Missouri, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati
East - USF, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, UConn, West Virginia

Then Four 5 Team Divisions for Basketball.

Marquette
Kansas
KSU
Mizz
TCU

Louisville
Cincinnati
DePaul
Notre Dame
West Virginia

Georgetown
Villanova
USF
Seton Hall
Rutgers

Syracuse
St. John's
Providence
Pittsburgh
UConn

That would be a massive basketball league.

Hypothetically leaves room for 4 more teams if the ACC goes next. Maryland to Big 10+ and the SEC talking to VTech and FSU

 

[ethangl]

The other thing about sixteen team superconferences, is how would it work schedule wise? Would there be room for OOC games? Divisions of eight with two OOC and three against the other division of your own conference?

16 team conferences definitely work a lot better if you expand to 14 game schedules (7 + 4 + 3 OOC) -- another thing that won't happen.

 

[gopats84]

Word now is Kansas, Kansas St, Missouri talking to Big East.

West - Kansas, KSU, Missouri, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati
East - USF, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, UConn, West Virginia

Then Four 5 Team Divisions for Basketball.

Marquette
Kansas
KSU
Mizz
TCU

Louisville
Cincinnati
DePaul
Notre Dame
West Virginia

Georgetown
Villanova
USF
Seton Hall
Rutgers

Syracuse
St. John's
Providence
Pittsburgh
UConn

That would be a massive basketball league.

Hypothetically leaves room for 4 more teams if the ACC goes next. Maryland to Big 10+ and the SEC talking to VTech and FSU

Where then does the Big 10+ go for a 14th team or more? Iowa State or further raid the ACC?

 

[Royal Reader]

Iowa State doesn't seem to have any value except in expanding for the sake of expanding. Poor team, not a good academic school, in a small state where they already have the bigger fish. They'd be better off adding Boise. (Incidentally, I could easily see Boise getting boned - Pac and B1G don't seem to want to associate with a school with their academics, and it's an awfully long way to Idaho from BE/ACC country).

 

[Sea Dog]

Iowa State doesn't seem to have any value except in expanding for the sake of expanding. Poor team, not a good academic school, in a small state where they already have the bigger fish. They'd be better off adding Boise. (Incidentally, I could easily see Boise getting boned - Pac and B1G don't seem to want to associate with a school with their academics, and it's an awfully long way to Idaho from BE/ACC country).

Actually, Iowa State's an AAU school. I think because it's Iowa State, a lot of people assume it's a poor school, but it isn't. The trouble would be location, location, location. Iowa's already in the conference, and it's not like anyone's fighting for that coveted Des Moines market to begin with.

 

[gopats84]

Iowa State doesn't seem to have any value except in expanding for the sake of expanding. Poor team, not a good academic school, in a small state where they already have the bigger fish. They'd be better off adding Boise. (Incidentally, I could easily see Boise getting boned - Pac and B1G don't seem to want to associate with a school with their academics, and it's an awfully long way to Idaho from BE/ACC country).

Unfortunately expanding for the sake is expanding could be a position some of these conferences find themselves in resulting in some realignments that are less than ideal from an academic or geographic standpoint. As bold a move as the 20-team basketball, 10-team football model would be for the Big East, I think it makes a lot of sense for a conference to be agressive, get the schools it wants and fit the best, then sit back and let the other chips fall around you. Otherwise you're in a position of picking through what is left.

Boise is in a tough spot. Only hope I see is the PAC-16 turns to them and maybe BYU if Texas doesn't bite.

 

[Skeesix]

Boise is legitimately terrible from an academic perspective. Stanford and Berkeley would (rightfully) balk at their inclusion in the PAC.

 

[Clears Cleaver]

So the rumored 14th SEC school is west Virginia? I don't get that as they don't bring a new recruiting base (PA?) or many eyeballs. But if it's true, that's a big blow to the big east.

I know accepting wiuld be smart, but the program would struggle to win in the sec versus being a favorite in the big east.

 

[BigMike]

So the rumored 14th SEC school is west Virginia? I don't get that as they don't bring a new recruiting base (PA?) or many eyeballs. But if it's true, that's a big blow to the big east.

I know accepting wiuld be smart, but the program would struggle to win in the sec versus being a favorite in the big east.

Really surprised they would go with WVU over Missouri; although I guess if you want to say what school not in the SEC fits in the SEC then WVU is the most logical answer. Missouri just seems like they bring so much more to the table

 

[Royal Reader]

Actually, Iowa State's an AAU school. I think because it's Iowa State, a lot of people assume it's a poor school, but it isn't. The trouble would be location, location, location. Iowa's already in the conference, and it's not like anyone's fighting for that coveted Des Moines market to begin with.

Well, it's below Tulsa and Auburn in the USNWR rankings. That said, it's above Mizzou, KU and Nebraska, and the latter got in, so your overall point is bang on the money. (From what I recall, they have one really world class department (engineering?) and the rest is pretty meh).

Kansas schools to BE makes sense. Mizzou? Meh, they'd probably rather be SEC or B1G, but if the invite doesn't come...

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

I am afraid that this is eventually going to lead to the casual college football fan getting screwed. Saturday is fantastic right now, through my regular cable subscription I can watch many college games, from different leagues on different channels. I always get to see the top games between the best teams. It's great.

On Sunday's I get 4 NFL games, dictated by regional coverage and not by the best matchup/most interesting game (aside from the Sunday night game). If I want to see more, I have to buy a special package.

When they move to the 16 team super conferences how long will it take for college football to descend down the NFL road into regional coverage and specific cable packages being sold for each super conference?

Living in the Northeast I am not to jazzed about my Saturday college football action being limited to a hypothetical conference of:
West - Kansas, KSU, Missouri, TCU, Louisville, Cincinnati
East - USF, Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, UConn, West Virginia

(I know there are lots of moving parts and this is far from final)

Not too many of those matchups are as exciting as most SEC games played weekly. In the end, I think we are all screwed.

 

[Zososoxfan]

This is the thing though... why would we assume it's going to be the ACC and not the Big East that survives? The SEC seems MUCH more likely to raid the ACC than the BE. Wouldn't that Big XII/Big East hybrid look like a stronger conference than an ACC which just got raided? They could then add Notre Dame and two ACC schools to complete the Superconference. Texas is going to be fine either way - any superconference would want them - so it's perhaps a question of them picking the schools they want to be with out of the remaining B12/ACC/East schools that don't get invited to the SEC, if they choose not to go West with the Sooners.

The other thing about sixteen team superconferences, is how would it work schedule wise? Would there be room for OOC games? Divisions of eight with two OOC and three against the other division of your own conference?

While I agree the ACC is more attractive to the SEC for raiding purposes, I think those same characteristics point to the ACC remaining one of the 4 superconferences. In other words, a bolstered ACC could compete with the other 3 conferences whereas if the best teams from the ACC go to the SEC, the BE would get crushed. The SEC is already a bitch of a schedule, so I don't see why top ACC teams would make the jump - I'm also assuming for the top dogs in the ACC, being competitive in a major conference is preferable to being in the hardest conference for some (I don't know how much) more $.

IMHO, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, and USF are the best and most lucrative (thus overall most desirable) programs in the BE. For geographic purposes, it makes sense to have USF go to the SEC (only the 2nd FL team, whereas they would be #3 in the ACC) and Rutgers go to the ACC. From a competition standpoint, I'd have Pitt and WVU go to the ACC as well, although the expansion of the B1G and the dissolution of the Big12 need to be considered as well. The B1G has already shown a lot of interest in Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers, and I assume that solid Big12 programs will be pursued by the SEC as well.

From a broad standpoint, any superconference alignment will be dictated by where UT and OU go. I'd personally love to see them in the B1G, but I can see them going to the PAC, B1G, or the SEC, or in UT's case, possibly staying indy. Once that shoe falls, the remaining Big12 programs will have significantly less options and may be picked up AFTER the top BE programs make their moves. At the end of the day, there are probably 10 or so identifiable schools that will have the biggest impact on the NCAA football landscape.

I also think basketball will play a bigger role than people think in these decisions. For instance, I don't think that mid-level football universities are aiming to get into the SEC to be a punching bag, but top basketball programs will consider the ACC much more desirable than other conferences. However, this a bit tangential and I'm not all that familiar with NCAA basketball conference realignment politics and issues.

 

[ethangl]

The latest chit is that the SEC wants the remaining nine Big 12 schools to sign a waiver stating that they will not sue the SEC over A&M's departure, and there is no way all nine schools would agree to do so.

 

[BigMike]

While I agree the ACC is more attractive to the SEC for raiding purposes, I think those same characteristics point to the ACC remaining one of the 4 superconferences. In other words, a bolstered ACC could compete with the other 3 conferences whereas if the best teams from the ACC go to the SEC, the BE would get crushed. The SEC is already a bitch of a schedule, so I don't see why top ACC teams would make the jump - I'm also assuming for the top dogs in the ACC, being competitive in a major conference is preferable to being in the hardest conference for some (I don't know how much) more $.

IMHO, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, and USF are the best and most lucrative (thus overall most desirable) programs in the BE. For geographic purposes, it makes sense to have USF go to the SEC (only the 2nd FL team, whereas they would be #3 in the ACC) and Rutgers go to the ACC. From a competition standpoint, I'd have Pitt and WVU go to the ACC as well, although the expansion of the B1G and the dissolution of the Big12 need to be considered as well. The B1G has already shown a lot of interest in Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers, and I assume that solid Big12 programs will be pursued by the SEC as well.

From a broad standpoint, any superconference alignment will be dictated by where UT and OU go. I'd personally love to see them in the B1G, but I can see them going to the PAC, B1G, or the SEC, or in UT's case, possibly staying indy. Once that shoe falls, the remaining Big12 programs will have significantly less options and may be picked up AFTER the top BE programs make their moves. At the end of the day, there are probably 10 or so identifiable schools that will have the biggest impact on the NCAA football landscape.

I also think basketball will play a bigger role than people think in these decisions. For instance, I don't think that mid-level football universities are aiming to get into the SEC to be a punching bag, but top basketball programs will consider the ACC much more desirable than other conferences. However, this a bit tangential and I'm not all that familiar with NCAA basketball conference realignment politics and issues.

I do think FSU, VT, Clemson, and Maryland would all be MUCH better off in an expanded ACC than they would in the SEC>

In terms of the Big East, and Big 12 leftovers (after Texas and the Oklahoma Pair)

I think Kansas is program conferences would want the most.
Missouri is probaby Second
Pitt is probably 3rd

After that I think is a jumble.

 

[DukeSox]

Quite amusing how much this crowd despises the ACC - is it just because BC left the big least to join a superior (in every way) conference?

ACC isn't going anywhere. A couple football schools may come and go...but ACC will remain.

 

[TomRicardo]

The appeal of the Big East over the ACC is that the Big East has an expiring tv contract. If major programs like Kansas jump to the Big East they will get a contract that will absolutely murder the ACC. Also the ACC is actually in danger of losing its football AQ status. If FSU leaves and Miami gets hit as it should, ACC is in dire straights. VTech leaving as well would be the death of the ACC as an AQ condference. Grabbing Rutgers and Syracuse would not save the ACC in football. Only WV could save them.


Adding Kansas, KSU, and Mizz would give the Big East an advantage in basketball. They could offer a premium game at least twice a week during conference play.

 

[TomRicardo]

Quite amusing how much this crowd despises the ACC - is it just because BC left the big least to join a superior (in every way) conference?

ACC isn't going anywhere. A couple football schools may come and go...but ACC will remain.

I would put more money on Duke in the Big 10+ in five years than the ACC surviving.

 

[DukeSox]

I would put more money on Duke in the Big 10+ in five years than the ACC surviving.

I would take this bet If there were anyway to realistically do it.

People are freaking about ACC losing AQ status...they only gained that recently to begin with. It's a basketball conference. That is what the ACC is. If you want to talk about the ACC becoming crappy in football - sure. The ACC will remain, may simply revert to what it always was and should be - championship-winning basketball conference that doesn't pretend to compete with SEC in football. Which it could never do given the academic standards at many (not all - these may be the ones that leave) of its institutions.

 

[Skeesix]

Sooooo... the ACC becomes the Big East of now? Where most people are predicting the downfall of the Big East because of football?

 

[SumnerH]

IMHO, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, and USF are the best and most lucrative (thus overall most desirable) programs in the BE.

I know that football makes (much) more money than basketball in general, but is an also-ran like USF really more lucrative than a UConn-level basketball program?