(07-17-2015 03:51 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 02:11 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  I would think that there are direct flights from Chicago to most of the ACC loactions. Austin is not a hub, so most flights to the East coast would require a change of planes, adding a couple of hours of travel time to the flights.

There would be a big difference in travel requirements for the two schools.

Here's the thing though, if you're flying commercial via Chicago from Notre Dame, its about 120 miles from South Bend to O'Hare. That's roughly two hours and realistically there's plenty of days where that takes nearly 3 hours with Chicagoland traffic. The reality is Notre Dame is mostly using charters from South Bend Airport just the same as UT would end up using mostly charters to ACC locales. Georgia Tech, Boston College and Miami seem to be the only places they could easily do commercial to. They can kind of sort of do commercial to Wake Forest via Charlotte but that still requires a 90 minute or more bus ride after stepping off the plane.

But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 03:51 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 02:11 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  I would think that there are direct flights from Chicago to most of the ACC loactions. Austin is not a hub, so most flights to the East coast would require a change of planes, adding a couple of hours of travel time to the flights.

There would be a big difference in travel requirements for the two schools.

Here's the thing though, if you're flying commercial via Chicago from Notre Dame, its about 120 miles from South Bend to O'Hare. That's roughly two hours and realistically there's plenty of days where that takes nearly 3 hours with Chicagoland traffic. The reality is Notre Dame is mostly using charters from South Bend Airport just the same as UT would end up using mostly charters to ACC locales. Georgia Tech, Boston College and Miami seem to be the only places they could easily do commercial to. They can kind of sort of do commercial to Wake Forest via Charlotte but that still requires a 90 minute or more bus ride after stepping off the plane.

But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 03:51 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 02:11 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  I would think that there are direct flights from Chicago to most of the ACC loactions. Austin is not a hub, so most flights to the East coast would require a change of planes, adding a couple of hours of travel time to the flights.

There would be a big difference in travel requirements for the two schools.

Here's the thing though, if you're flying commercial via Chicago from Notre Dame, its about 120 miles from South Bend to O'Hare. That's roughly two hours and realistically there's plenty of days where that takes nearly 3 hours with Chicagoland traffic. The reality is Notre Dame is mostly using charters from South Bend Airport just the same as UT would end up using mostly charters to ACC locales. Georgia Tech, Boston College and Miami seem to be the only places they could easily do commercial to. They can kind of sort of do commercial to Wake Forest via Charlotte but that still requires a 90 minute or more bus ride after stepping off the plane.

But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

The only equivalency is to convert the LHN into an ND NBC type of football home games only type of deal worth $20 million or more.

But the big drawback there is that ND supposedly only gets about $5M from the ACC TV contract. So UT loses $15M in terms of the B12 TV deal versus the ACC TV deal as an indy.

Not sure there is anything the ACC (or the PAC for that matter) can do to match the cumulative total of $35M that Texas gets between the LHN and the B12 TV contract.

We are talking SEC or B1G numbers there.

Cheers,
Neil

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 03:51 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 02:11 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  I would think that there are direct flights from Chicago to most of the ACC loactions. Austin is not a hub, so most flights to the East coast would require a change of planes, adding a couple of hours of travel time to the flights.

There would be a big difference in travel requirements for the two schools.

Here's the thing though, if you're flying commercial via Chicago from Notre Dame, its about 120 miles from South Bend to O'Hare. That's roughly two hours and realistically there's plenty of days where that takes nearly 3 hours with Chicagoland traffic. The reality is Notre Dame is mostly using charters from South Bend Airport just the same as UT would end up using mostly charters to ACC locales. Georgia Tech, Boston College and Miami seem to be the only places they could easily do commercial to. They can kind of sort of do commercial to Wake Forest via Charlotte but that still requires a 90 minute or more bus ride after stepping off the plane.

But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 03:51 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Here's the thing though, if you're flying commercial via Chicago from Notre Dame, its about 120 miles from South Bend to O'Hare. That's roughly two hours and realistically there's plenty of days where that takes nearly 3 hours with Chicagoland traffic. The reality is Notre Dame is mostly using charters from South Bend Airport just the same as UT would end up using mostly charters to ACC locales. Georgia Tech, Boston College and Miami seem to be the only places they could easily do commercial to. They can kind of sort of do commercial to Wake Forest via Charlotte but that still requires a 90 minute or more bus ride after stepping off the plane.

But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

(07-17-2015 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

Right, air time won't be a problem and they'll only move if they make more money. The question is how UT can make more money by moving than they make now.

(07-17-2015 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:06 PM)SMUmustangs Wrote:  But Austin is still roughly twice as far from most of the East coast schools as Notre Dame.

The thing is, Texas does not have to accept being in a situation where they are so isolated from the rest of the conference. West Virginia did not have much of a choice.....Texas does.

Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

But while the set-up may be enticing are the profits overall divided equally or not? Assuming the subscriptions in the state of California are higher than other PAC states (which may not be the case) - Do the California schools get more money for their PAC Los Angeles and PAC Bay area portions of the overall network? Or is that $$$ pooled into the the overall PACN which is then divided equally amongst all the schools?

Cheers,
Neil

(07-17-2015 06:44 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

But while the set-up may be enticing are the profits overall divided equally or not? Assuming the subscriptions in the state of California are higher than other PAC states (which may not be the case) - Do the California schools get more money for their PAC Los Angeles and PAC Bay area portions of the overall network? Or is that $$$ pooled into the the overall PACN which is then divided equally amongst all the schools?

Cheers,
Neil

No doubt there are more total subscribers in California than any other state -- there are about 39 million people in California and about 26 million in the rest of the conference's states combined -- but the money is divided equally. There are no separate subscriptions for the different regional channels; you just get the regional channel along with the national channel if you live in that channel's region and your provider carries the regional channels.

(07-17-2015 06:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:10 PM)bullet Wrote:  Yes, I just don't think it makes any sense. LHN can be dealt with in the B1G or Pac. ACC has got to be #5 on the list of options. I don't think independence is really on anyone's mind or makes any sense.

Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

Right, air time won't be a problem and they'll only move if they make more money. The question is how UT can make more money by moving than they make now.

They can't make more anywhere else now. 10 years, 20 years, who knows?

Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

(07-17-2015 08:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

Delany and Swofford won't be around much longer. Slive's already gone.

For that matter, by 2023, Bowlsby won't be and Scott will have probably moved on to something else.

It could be a very different dynamic with weak commissioners compared to what we had over the last 5 years. Power could shift to the presidents from the conference office.

(07-17-2015 08:52 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 08:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

Delany and Swofford won't be around much longer. Slive's already gone.

For that matter, by 2023, Bowlsby won't be and Scott will have probably moved on to something else.

It could be a very different dynamic with weak commissioners compared to what we had over the last 5 years. Power could shift to the presidents from the conference office.

With the rise of the corporate network power that might be like closing the barn door after the horses are out. We'll see.

(07-17-2015 08:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 06:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:55 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:45 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 05:31 PM)omniorange Wrote:  Not sure the LHN can be "dealt" with in the PAC. LHN is generating $15M annually for Texas. Simply folding it into the PACN won't get them anywhere near that kind of money.

"Dealing with LHN" just means UT getting a bigger slice of the conference's pie. I don't think they will join the Pac-12, or the Big Ten, or the SEC, unless they get unequal revenue sharing. They have the leverage (i.e., the value they'd add to any conference's TV deal) to demand it. The impasse is that each of those conferences divides TV money equally.

Practically, because it takes a super-majority vote to approve expansion (in the Pac, for example, 9 of 12 have to vote yes), and expansion and unequal revenue sharing would essentially be a package deal, to change the status quo and vote in unequal revenue sharing, you need almost everyone in a conference to agree to take less so that the two or three big kahunas in the conference can take more.

Texas wouldn't go anywhere for less money. The Pac has their 2 team mini-networks that could still give Texas lots of air time. And if Texas was moving to the Pac they would be generating enough in some way to make it worth it.

Right, air time won't be a problem and they'll only move if they make more money. The question is how UT can make more money by moving than they make now.

They can't make more anywhere else now. 10 years, 20 years, who knows?

You might be right, but not sure that statement is true when it comes to either the B1G or even the SEC (more likely with the B1G than SEC since their national TV contract is upcoming and the state of Texas would be added to the BTN while it will just be enhanced for the SEC.

Cheers,
Neil

If you take OU and maybe KU out of the big 12, than texas will have to leave the big 12. At that point, not sure the big 10, sec, pac 12 or ACC would give texas a sweetheart deal. Thus, the key to killing the LHN is to get OU.

(07-17-2015 08:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

This lineup sounds like an SEC dream, picking up all of Virginia and North Carolina and shutting the BIG down from expanding eastward, while also picking up Florida State, Clemson and Georgia Tech and filling the Big 12 with a bunch of second tier programs. And ND to the BIG? If ND is forced to join a conference, it would be the ACC not the BIG.

JR, I think you have your SEC colored glasses on for this one.

(07-18-2015 12:00 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 08:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

This lineup sounds like an SEC dream, picking up all of Virginia and North Carolina and shutting the BIG down from expanding eastward, while also picking up Florida State, Clemson and Georgia Tech and filling the Big 12 with a bunch of second tier programs. And ND to the BIG? If ND is forced to join a conference, it would be the ACC not the BIG.

JR, I think you have your SEC colored glasses on for this one.

No, just Southern schools for the SEC. And other than that it is very slow. You bit.

(07-18-2015 12:27 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-18-2015 12:00 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(07-17-2015 08:27 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Someday Delany will get around to the obvious. Add the California 4, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Syracuse, Notre Dame, and Kansas and divide into 4 divisions.

Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Ohio State
Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington

Then the Big 12 could look like this:
Arizona, Arizona State, Brigham Young, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Utah
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, West Virginia

The SEC could look like this:
Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Vanderbilt
Alabama, Kentucky, Florida State, Miami, South Carolina, Tennessee
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

That's a P3 comprised of the present 65 minus Oregon State and Washington State plus Cincinnati, Connecticut, and Brigham Young. It's balanced, geographically grouped into 6 team divisions that keep most minor sports relatively local. And it allows for some great networks.

This lineup sounds like an SEC dream, picking up all of Virginia and North Carolina and shutting the BIG down from expanding eastward, while also picking up Florida State, Clemson and Georgia Tech and filling the Big 12 with a bunch of second tier programs. And ND to the BIG? If ND is forced to join a conference, it would be the ACC not the BIG.

JR, I think you have your SEC colored glasses on for this one.

No, just Southern schools for the SEC. And other than that it is very slow. You bit.

You were waiting for me.