(02-08-2018 02:39 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(02-08-2018 02:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  A thought I had: If at least one power conference were to reach 16 schools, perhaps they might lobby the NCAA to permit a 2-round, 4-team championship for any conference that reaches 16 schools. What are the odds of this succeeding? And if it did succeed, could this trigger expansion by those power conferences with fewer than 16, even if they would otherwise not have expanded?

I suspect this may not be plausible. For the lobbying to succeed, the request may have to be for a 2-round championship regardless of conference size, or perhaps with 12 or 14 as a minimum instead. This would get the backing of those conferences not seeking to expand. And in any case, there might be hesitation by the NCAA to permit such a change due to the potential for realignment-related instability.

That would mean the teams in the national title game would have played 16 games that season (12 regular season, two conference playoffs, two CFP). That might be a bridge too far for approval. Plus there's really no need for a second layer of conference postseason with just 16 teams, since scheduling with eight-team divisions is still easy enough (seven in-division games, one or two interdivision games).

Now if conferences got big enough to go to three or four divisions, the two-round proposal would have more support, I'd think (four division champs or three champs and a wild card). But it would probably require most if not all conferences to swell to that point.

The teams in the FCS championship can play up to 16 games, and no one bats an eye at that.

And it's not about "need" for a 2-round conference playoff. It's about $$$, as always. The power conferences would rather expand their playoffs to 4 rather than expand the CFP to 8.

So here's a possible(?) scenario:

With the expiration of the Big 12's GOR imminent, Oklahoma arranges to join the SEC with OSU in tow. With its conference's power status in question, Texas at last bolts for the Pac, bringing along Tech, TCU, and wild card Houston.

Dollar signs in their eyes, both the Pac-16 and SEC lobby the NCAA to permit a 2-round, 4-team playoff for conferences with 16 football schools. The Big Ten is opposed to this idea due to the lack of what they would consider suitable expansion candidates. However, the ACC supports the lobbying effort, seeing it as a means to secure the Irish as full members. With 3 of the 4 remaining power conferences pushing against them, the NCAA relents.

Its hand forced, the Big Ten scores a surprise coup by poaching Missouri from the SEC. Kansas also joins to make 16. (Iowa State is very disappointed.)

The SEC is chagrined at the defection but privately relieved to have Missouri off their hands. An extremely lucky West Virginia is selected as a replacement, allowing the SEC further inroads into Big Ten territory.

As expected, ND wisely goes all in with the ACC, which picks up Cincinnati to round out its membership to 16.

Plausible? Comments appreciated!

Since I recently learned that Missouri is bound to the SEC -- or ESPN, I guess -- by a grant of media rights until 2033-34, my optimism for a 4x16 power conference alignment within the next several years has waned significantly. (I was already rather pessimistic.) As I see it, the main problem is the Big Ten finding #16, assuming Kansas is #15. The conference's high academic standards severely limit their options. All ACC schools, including ND, are out due to their grant of media rights (which expires 2035-36), so no Virginia, UNC, Duke, or GT even if there were a mutual interest. Pitt is out due to the ACC GoR and market redundancy. Iowa State is out due to market redundancy. The big prizes would be Oklahoma and Texas, but the Big Ten landing even one of them would cut off the most likely expansion route for either the Pac (UT and friends) or the SEC (OU/OSU).

So here's a "Hail Mary" -- Colorado to the Big Ten. Seems implausible, especially given CU's attraction to California and that they only just recently received access to it by joining the Pac. However, despite being a geographic outlier for the Big Ten, CU does meet the academic criteria and would add a new market. There's also the resumption of the Colorado-Nebraska annual series, if that has any merit at all.

Running with this admittedly unlikely scenario, if the Pac were to lose Colorado, they would presumably want a replacement. Would Colorado State suffice? They're a clear second banana in the state, but their academics are good (though not CU good), they've got a brand new stadium, and the Pac would at least retain some presence in the Denver market.

Any thoughts?

(06-13-2017 10:20 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Hi all! I'm new to the board. I'd love to see a 4x16 power conference realignment, even if simply for the symmetry and balance of it. Unfortunately, plausible routes that lead there are not so easy to envision. Below is what I think to be the most plausible route (at the moment). Feel free to critique my scenario and to post your own!

With the expiration of the Big 12's grant of media rights looming in 2025, the collapse of the conference seems imminent. Those members that have escape routes begin feeling them out, while the other conferences circle like sharks around a sinking ship.

The Pac-12 strikes first, securing the Longhorns and sealing the fate of the Big 12. Part of the deal is that three other schools in UT's backyard tag along. The Sooners balk at the offer and instead opt for the SEC. A relieved Oklahoma State also receives an invitation from the SEC (at the urging of OU and the Oklahoma state legislature). Fortunately, there isn't enough bad blood between UT and OU over the split to prevent an annual out-of-conference Red River Showdown.

The move by OU limits the Longhorns' options for travel partners. Texas Tech is deemed acceptable by the Pac, as it was when the first offer to UT was made back in 2010. The Pac sneers at TCU for being a religious school, but their academics are nothing to scoff at, so the Horned Frogs also receive an invite. In a situation similar to the formation of the Big 12 in 1996, Baylor angles for the fourth Texas slot. However, the scandal-ridden Bears are turned down, as the Pac invites Houston instead and in this manner becomes the Pac-16.

The Big Ten cannot pass up the chance to add to its basketball chops and pick up another state, admitting Kansas as its 15th member. While the Big Ten sat at an odd number of schools for two decades before the acquisition of Nebraska, it's not an ideal situation from a scheduling standpoint, so a 16th member is sought. Iowa State meets the basic qualifications but offers nothing new. The Big Ten would love to add Notre Dame, though the Irish are yoked to the ACC until the expiration of that conference's GOR in 2036.

The 16th member of the Big Ten ends up being a school which had recently begged to get in: Missouri. A school's voluntarily leaving the SEC had seemed unthinkable for many, but the Big Ten is a better fit for the Tigers in terms of culture and academics, and the timing is right. The defection is facilitated by the SEC's lack of a financial penalty for departing schools. Indignant over the coup, the SEC taps an ecstatic West Virginia as a replacement.

By this time, it has become evident that 16-school conferences are what's in. The ACC, as the weakest remaining power conference, must go with the flow or risking falling too far behind. Notre Dame also sees the writing on the wall and finally relinquishes its football independence for a spot in the ACC and a decent chance at a CFP championship. The ACC considers adding Cincinnati over Connecticut to better bolster its football reputation, but ultimately selects UConn for its stellar hoops.

Sadly, Iowa State and Kansas State fall down the AAC or MWC along with Baylor.

Thus we arrive at a 4x16 power conference alignment. (Here's a map!) Each conference consists of four 4-team "pods," which alternate between two 8-team divisions every two years. For two years it's the "Northeast" and "Southwest" Divisions, and for the next two it's the "Northwest" and "Southeast" Divisions.

ACC
East: Boston College, Connecticut, Virginia, Virginia Tech
North: Louisville, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami
West: Duke, NC State, North Carolina, Wake Forest

Protected crossovers: Boston College/Notre Dame, North Carolina/Virginia

Big Ten
East: Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers
North: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin
South: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue
West: Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska

Protected crossovers: Illinois/Northwestern, Michigan/Ohio State

Pac-16
East: Houston, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
West: California, Stanford, UCLA, USC

Protected crossovers: none

SEC
East: Florida, Georgia, LSU, South Carolina
North: Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

Annual interconference matchups
Clemson/South Carolina
Florida/Florida State
Georgia/Georgia Tech
Kentucky/Louisville
Notre Dame/USC
Oklahoma/Texas

The conference schedule is 9 games across the board. For two years, each team plays a home-and-home against the 3 teams in its pod, the 4 other teams in its division, and 2 teams from the "opposite" pod (i.e., North vs. South, East vs. West). For the next two years, each team plays a home-and-home against the 3 teams in its pod again, the 4 other teams in its division (this time it's a different pod of 4), and the other 2 teams from the opposite pod. This way, with the exception of protected crossovers, each team plays every other team in its conference twice in 4 years.

Conference championships proceed between the two divisions as they do currently. The CFP becomes a de facto (if not de jure) competition between the champions of the four remaining power conferences.

So what do you all think? Poke (constructive) holes in this scenario if you see any, and submit your own scenarios! :)

"simply for the symmetry and balance of it"

Major college athletic conferences will not form a 4 x 16 organization just to satisfy your OCD anxiety. Each conference will choose to expand, or not, based on what will take them to their optimum configuration. (economic, academic, athletic, etc.)

(10-03-2018 10:22 AM)33laszlo99 Wrote:  "simply for the symmetry and balance of it"

Major college athletic conferences will not form a 4 x 16 organization just to satisfy your OCD anxiety. Each conference will choose to expand, or not, based on what will take them to their optimum configuration. (economic, academic, athletic, etc.)

I'm fully aware of all that. It's just fun to envision, is all.

(06-14-2017 02:05 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I don't think you will see the pod system instead I see two mini conferenences under one umbrella. Conferences go to 9 game conference schedule and one crossover rival and on interdivisional game. CCG are now default Semi's. Winners to CFP and Losers to ROSE/SUGAR/ORANGE

Using the ACC as an example.

Atlantic vs Coastal (Using existing lineup, I do think there will be teams moving divisions if ND ever joins)
FSU vs MIAMI
CLEMSON vs GT
NCSU VS UNC
WAKE vs DUKE
SYC vs Pitt
LVille vs UVA
BC vs VT
ND vs TEAM 16

Which is why the ACC is the only conference that would go to 16. The rest are too inter-connected and don't want to become two separate conferences.

(10-03-2018 08:50 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Since I recently learned that Missouri is bound to the SEC -- or ESPN, I guess -- by a grant of media rights until 2033-34, my optimism for a 4x16 power conference alignment within the next several years has waned significantly. (I was already rather pessimistic.) As I see it, the main problem is the Big Ten finding #16, assuming Kansas is #15. The conference's high academic standards severely limit their options. All ACC schools, including ND, are out due to their grant of media rights (which expires 2035-36), so no Virginia, UNC, Duke, or GT even if there were a mutual interest. Pitt is out due to the ACC GoR and market redundancy. Iowa State is out due to market redundancy. The big prizes would be Oklahoma and Texas, but the Big Ten landing even one of them would cut off the most likely expansion route for either the Pac (UT and friends) or the SEC (OU/OSU).

So here's a "Hail Mary" -- Colorado to the Big Ten. Seems implausible, especially given CU's attraction to California and that they only just recently received access to it by joining the Pac. However, despite being a geographic outlier for the Big Ten, CU does meet the academic criteria and would add a new market. There's also the resumption of the Colorado-Nebraska annual series, if that has any merit at all.

Running with this admittedly unlikely scenario, if the Pac were to lose Colorado, they would presumably want a replacement. Would Colorado State suffice? They're a clear second banana in the state, but their academics are good (though not CU good), they've got a brand new stadium, and the Pac would at least retain some presence in the Denver market.

Any thoughts?

UNLV might look like a substantially different expansion candidate in 2025 with the 60k seat state-of-the-art FB stadium and rise of Vegas as a sports market (2 pro teams). PAC might tab them emergency back-up.

(10-04-2018 10:53 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  UNLV might look like a substantially different expansion candidate in 2025 with the 60k seat state-of-the-art FB stadium and rise of Vegas as a sports market (2 pro teams). PAC might tab them emergency back-up.

Wait I thought y'all were always talking about how NFL-markets can't coexist with college football?

Pretty much every scenario involves at least one conference severely diluting itself just for the sake of getting to 16. That's why I can never imagine this happening.

Plus the major conferences want to be able to play non-power conference teams as patsies on occasion.

(10-05-2018 12:21 AM)Poster Wrote:  Pretty much every scenario involves at least one conference severely diluting itself just for the sake of getting to 16. That's why I can never imagine this happening.

Plus the major conferences want to be able to play non-power conference teams as patsies on occasion.

Yep. The only way it works symmetrically is in a 3 x 20. Most likely we will wind up with conferences of different sizes if there is another expansion.

For instance if either the SEC or Big 10 were to land both Oklahoma and UT I would think the other's best position would be to remain static. Let's say that in order to prevent both heading someplace like the Big 10 that the SEC took the Texa-homa package. Now the SEC would be at 18, the Big 10 at 14, and the ACC either at 15 plus N.D. or 14 plus N.D. and the PAC would likely stick at 12.

There wouldn't be any reason for the PAC to take a Texas private and Kansas and KState together don't bring enough. The B1G doesn't need ISU and the ACC may or may not pass on WVU. That move alone would end us in asymmetry.

The only way I can possibly conceive of 4 by 16 is if the Big 12 and ACC both get raided pretty badly, and the remaining teams (if they end up totaling exactly 16) decide to merge to form a conference of misfit toys. That would be the only scenario where I can really imagine it being in anybody’s self interest to create a 16 team conference that’s not very valuable.

(10-03-2018 08:50 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Since I recently learned that Missouri is bound to the SEC -- or ESPN, I guess -- by a grant of media rights until 2033-34, my optimism for a 4x16 power conference alignment within the next several years has waned significantly. (I was already rather pessimistic.) As I see it, the main problem is the Big Ten finding #16, assuming Kansas is #15. The conference's high academic standards severely limit their options. All ACC schools, including ND, are out due to their grant of media rights (which expires 2035-36), so no Virginia, UNC, Duke, or GT even if there were a mutual interest. Pitt is out due to the ACC GoR and market redundancy. Iowa State is out due to market redundancy. The big prizes would be Oklahoma and Texas, but the Big Ten landing even one of them would cut off the most likely expansion route for either the Pac (UT and friends) or the SEC (OU/OSU).

So here's a "Hail Mary" -- Colorado to the Big Ten. Seems implausible, especially given CU's attraction to California and that they only just recently received access to it by joining the Pac. However, despite being a geographic outlier for the Big Ten, CU does meet the academic criteria and would add a new market. There's also the resumption of the Colorado-Nebraska annual series, if that has any merit at all.

Running with this admittedly unlikely scenario, if the Pac were to lose Colorado, they would presumably want a replacement. Would Colorado State suffice? They're a clear second banana in the state, but their academics are good (though not CU good), they've got a brand new stadium, and the Pac would at least retain some presence in the Denver market.

Any thoughts?

Anyone have opinions on Colorado to the Big Ten?

I don't think the SEC has a GOR. My suspicion is that GORs wouldn't actually prove to be as airtight as everybody thinks they are if somebody violated it. Although there's not a lot of way to know for sure until somebody takes the risk.

Actually the best alignment is to have 6 conferences, all regionally specific.

I'll start with the ACC:
UVa, Carolina, State, Wake, Duke, Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami and Vanderbilt

The NE conference:
BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, WVU, Rutgers, Maryland, Penn State, Notre Dame, Virginia Tech

The SEC:
Florida, Georgia, SC, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, Kentucky, MSU, Ole Miss, LSU, A&M, ARk.

Big 10
OSU, Mich, Minn, Wisc, Ill, Ind, Purdue, NW, Iowa, MSU

Plains:
Iowa St., Nebraska, Kansas, KSU, Oklahoma, OSU, Texas, TT, Baylor, TCU, Missouri

PAC:
Wash, wSU, Oregon, OSU, Stan., Cal, UCLA, USC, Ariz, ASU, Utah, Colorado

The Plains Conference could add Colorado if the PAC was willing to take BYU as a football only member.

(10-04-2018 10:53 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(10-03-2018 08:50 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Since I recently learned that Missouri is bound to the SEC -- or ESPN, I guess -- by a grant of media rights until 2033-34, my optimism for a 4x16 power conference alignment within the next several years has waned significantly. (I was already rather pessimistic.) As I see it, the main problem is the Big Ten finding #16, assuming Kansas is #15. The conference's high academic standards severely limit their options. All ACC schools, including ND, are out due to their grant of media rights (which expires 2035-36), so no Virginia, UNC, Duke, or GT even if there were a mutual interest. Pitt is out due to the ACC GoR and market redundancy. Iowa State is out due to market redundancy. The big prizes would be Oklahoma and Texas, but the Big Ten landing even one of them would cut off the most likely expansion route for either the Pac (UT and friends) or the SEC (OU/OSU).

So here's a "Hail Mary" -- Colorado to the Big Ten. Seems implausible, especially given CU's attraction to California and that they only just recently received access to it by joining the Pac. However, despite being a geographic outlier for the Big Ten, CU does meet the academic criteria and would add a new market. There's also the resumption of the Colorado-Nebraska annual series, if that has any merit at all.

Running with this admittedly unlikely scenario, if the Pac were to lose Colorado, they would presumably want a replacement. Would Colorado State suffice? They're a clear second banana in the state, but their academics are good (though not CU good), they've got a brand new stadium, and the Pac would at least retain some presence in the Denver market.

Any thoughts?

UNLV might look like a substantially different expansion candidate in 2025 with the 60k seat state-of-the-art FB stadium and rise of Vegas as a sports market (2 pro teams). PAC might tab them emergency back-up.

UNLV wouldn't suffice from an academic standpoint and doesn't have a big brother with leverage to get them in.

UNLV in the PAC is one of the worst realignment ideas I have ever heard. I don't know which is worse- UNLV to the PAC or Buffalo to the Big 10.

(10-05-2018 06:11 PM)Poster Wrote:  UNLV in the PAC is one of the worst realignment ideas I have ever heard. I don't know which is worse- UNLV to the PAC or Buffalo to the Big 10.

I think you should weigh the fact that Buffalo to the Big 10 was in almost every scenario I've read or goosed, a troll of the Big 10 guys. UNLV assumptions may or may not be something the poster involves believes in. But I would feel comfortable in saying that the vast majority of suggestions of Buffalo are just a troll.

(06-13-2017 11:50 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  UConn isn't getting into the ACC unless one of the two things happen:

A. The schools where football is the priority have left

or

B. Norte Dame makes it an absolute requirement for them joining in full.


Neither is a realistic scenario at this point.

Don't know who Norte Dame is, but Notre Dame will never join any conference for any reason, and yes, I'm even including the P4 conferences, champs only format. I can see ND cutting off its nose to spite it's face. Let ND become the next SMU.

(10-03-2018 08:50 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Since I recently learned that Missouri is bound to the SEC -- or ESPN, I guess -- by a grant of media rights until 2033-34, my optimism for a 4x16 power conference alignment within the next several years has waned significantly. (I was already rather pessimistic.) As I see it, the main problem is the Big Ten finding #16, assuming Kansas is #15. The conference's high academic standards severely limit their options. All ACC schools, including ND, are out due to their grant of media rights (which expires 2035-36), so no Virginia, UNC, Duke, or GT even if there were a mutual interest. Pitt is out due to the ACC GoR and market redundancy. Iowa State is out due to market redundancy. The big prizes would be Oklahoma and Texas, but the Big Ten landing even one of them would cut off the most likely expansion route for either the Pac (UT and friends) or the SEC (OU/OSU).

So here's a "Hail Mary" -- Colorado to the Big Ten. Seems implausible, especially given CU's attraction to California and that they only just recently received access to it by joining the Pac. However, despite being a geographic outlier for the Big Ten, CU does meet the academic criteria and would add a new market. There's also the resumption of the Colorado-Nebraska annual series, if that has any merit at all.

Running with this admittedly unlikely scenario, if the Pac were to lose Colorado, they would presumably want a replacement. Would Colorado State suffice? They're a clear second banana in the state, but their academics are good (though not CU good), they've got a brand new stadium, and the Pac would at least retain some presence in the Denver market.

Any thoughts?

Like your Hail Mary idea, but, let's tweak it a tad. The Big Ten goes for USC. Yep, don't adjust your computer monitor, you read right, USC to the Big Ten. USC to the Big Ten accomplishes a lot of the same things that Texas to the Big Ten would, and I don't see the SEC opposing that move. USC has been on record that it has not been happy with the performance of the Pac 12 Network, and has hinted at possibly leaving the Pac12 over this. This would also be the catalyst to the Pac 12 Network shopping itself to ESPN or Fox, though I have a feeling that ESPN might be preferred. Now this puts the SEC in a somewhat of a bind, and now they realize why they should have blocked the USC to the Big Ten move, because now ESPN can direct Texas & friends to the now Pac 11.

(10-06-2018 01:44 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-13-2017 11:50 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  UConn isn't getting into the ACC unless one of the two things happen:

A. The schools where football is the priority have left

or

B. Norte Dame makes it an absolute requirement for them joining in full.


Neither is a realistic scenario at this point.

Don't know who Norte Dame is, but Notre Dame will never join any conference for any reason, and yes, I'm even including the P4 conferences, champs only format. I can see ND cutting off its nose to spite it's face. Let ND become the next SMU.

Jack Swarbrick has given several interviews in which he states that if a P4, champs only playoff scenario was legally established, ND football will join a conference immediately after that fact.