(12-19-2020 11:59 AM)whittx Wrote:  

(12-19-2020 11:01 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-19-2020 10:01 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Since ESPN ran the article on the 25th anniversary of the death of the SWC, here's an alternate scenario.

The then Big 8 tells Texas Tech and Baylor that they aren't welcome to their conference, only Texas and Texas A&M can come.

Do both accept and they become a conference of 10?

Does Texas A&M join the SEC and Texas join the then Pac-10 with Colorado?

Is the SWC forced to stay intact because the Texas politicians force UT and A&M to keep it together since they couldn't bully the Big 8?

Would a Big 8 of 10 teams (it wouldn't be called the Big 10) still be in place today or with most of its core intact (Colorado probably leaves but maybe Nebraska, Missouri, and Texas A&M stay and the Big 8 can either just replace Colorado or have a conference of 9).

With six remaining members instead of four, what happens to the SWC?

Does the WAC still invite Texas schools and if so do Baylor and/or Texas Tech get considered instead of SMU, Rice, or TCU? For the WAC, it's harder to get to Lubbock and Waco than Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston. Texas and A&M and possibly the Oklahoma schools can at least drive to Tech and Baylor. Try flying from Wyoming to Baylor.

Maybe Arkansas and TAMU to the SEC

Texas and Colorado to the PAC 10

TTU to the Big 8 (replacing Colorado)

TCU, Rice, SMU, and Baylor invite Tulane and Tulsa to the SWC (6 was enough for a conference then) The question would be when the minimum becomes 8.

La Tech and Southern Miss.

Y’all forgetting Houston? I thinks perhaps you the remaining 5 add Tulane, Tulsa, Southern Miss, UAB, Memphis, Louisville, and Cincinnati.

East: Cincinnati, Louisville, Memphis, Southern Miss, Tulane, UAB
West: Baylor, Houston, Rice, SMU, TCU, Tulsa

So, if it’s 1994 and there’s conversations between the Texas schools and the Big 8 and Arkansas is already in the SEC I think things could get interesting.

If the Big 8 is 100% uninterested in going to 12 and adding the CCG they’d have leverage on Texas and TAMU.

I think the SWC survives: TTU, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Rice, and SMU would all still be there. There’d also be plenty of expansion possibilities: UTEP, Tulsa, Tulane, USM

Houston might have even convinced Memphis, Louisville, and Cincinnati to come in for football only.

If the Big 8 is interested in 12 and a CCG in 1994 I think eventually they’d have to be due to the lucrative nature of the game and the fact that a markets driven revenue model meant that conferences were looking to grow. The question is when and where. Do they dip back into the old SWC inventory for their final 2 or do they go west with say Utah and BYU?

(07-07-2017 05:42 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  Post your alternate history and future college sports realignment scenarios here!

Here's the present day alignment of power conferences in an alternate timeline in which the Big East football wing never formed. The SEC added Florida State (before the ACC could) as well as independent Miami, while the ACC expanded north, picking up most of the would-be Big East football schools. The Big 8 was torn apart by the Pac, Big Ten, and SEC. The Southwest Conference lasted a bit longer than in our timeline (OTL), past Ann Richards's tenure as governor. Thus when they were eventually beheaded by the Pac, Houston came along rather than Baylor.

ACC
East: Maryland, Virginia, Virginia Tech, West Virginia
North: Boston College, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Temple
South: Duke, NC State, North Carolina, Wake Forest
West: Cincinnati, Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville

Protected crossovers: North Carolina/Virginia, Pittsburgh/West Virginia

Big 16
East: Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Syracuse
North: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Purdue
South: Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
West: Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin

Protected crossovers: Illinois/Northwestern, Indiana/Purdue, Michigan/Ohio State

Pac-16
East: Houston, Texas, Texas A&M, 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, Florida State, Georgia, Miami
North: Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
South: Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi State, Ole Miss
West: Arkansas, LSU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

Protected crossovers: Alabama/Tennessee, Auburn/Georgia

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

************

Index to some scenarios of mine

Big 12 restocks to 12 with Cincinnati/Louisville/TCU/WVU
Big 12 restocks to 12 with Houston/Louisville/TCU/WVU (must expand)
Metro Conference football is a go in 1991
Pac-16 leads to 8x16 FBS
Pac-16 leads to Big 12 absorbing Big East football
ACC preempts Big East football
EAC forms in 1991
CCG deregulation in late 2011
ACC and Big 12 gutted, remnants merge
ACC and Big 12 gutted, Clemson/FSU/GT/Miami to Big 12, ACC rebuilds
Texoma 4 to Pac-16 leads to P4x16 (Kansas/Missouri to Big Ten, NCSU/VT/WVU to SEC, Baylor/Cincy/ND/TCU to ACC)
"Reversed Fortunes"
No WAC-16
ACC gutted but Big 12 loses just Colorado
Big East takes TV deal in spring 2011
4x15 power conferences
Texoma 4 to Pac-16 leads to P4x16 (Kansas/Missouri to Big Ten, NCSU/VT/WVU to SEC, Houston/Navy/ND/TCU to ACC)
Future ACC with ND football and FB-only Navy

(12-19-2020 12:22 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(12-19-2020 12:09 PM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  

(12-19-2020 10:01 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Since ESPN ran the article on the 25th anniversary of the death of the SWC, here's an alternate scenario.

The then Big 8 tells Texas Tech and Baylor that they aren't welcome to their conference, only Texas and Texas A&M can come.

Do both accept and they become a conference of 10?

Does Texas A&M join the SEC and Texas join the then Pac-10 with Colorado?

Is the SWC forced to stay intact because the Texas politicians force UT and A&M to keep it together since they couldn't bully the Big 8?

Would a Big 8 of 10 teams (it wouldn't be called the Big 10) still be in place today or with most of its core intact (Colorado probably leaves but maybe Nebraska, Missouri, and Texas A&M stay and the Big 8 can either just replace Colorado or have a conference of 9).

With six remaining members instead of four, what happens to the SWC?

Does the WAC still invite Texas schools and if so do Baylor and/or Texas Tech get considered instead of SMU, Rice, or TCU? For the WAC, it's harder to get to Lubbock and Waco than Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston. Texas and A&M and possibly the Oklahoma schools can at least drive to Tech and Baylor. Try flying from Wyoming to Baylor.

At the time getting to 12 to host a CCG was important so my guess is that the SWC/Big 8 merger wasn't going to include less than 12 schools

I disagree with that. The only conference championship game at the time was the SEC's and it started in 1992. When the Big 12 was considering adding the Texas schools the SEC CG was only a couple of years old and was in Birmingham (they hadn't moved to Atlanta yet).

I don't know this for fact just a guess but I doubt the Big 12 who was a new forming conference wouldn't include 12 members to stage a CCG and the extra $ and publicity it brought. Didn't the big 12 have 11 members with Baylor latching on to be 12? Doesn't make sense to stop at 11

Let’s play with an idea here:

In the early 90s the Big Ten and ACC both take a more aggressive approach to expansion.

Pitt joins Penn St in the Big Ten.

Miami, Syracuse, and BC join Florida St in the ACC.

I’ll say we get a Metro Conference/C-USA that incorporates:

USM, Tulane, Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati, WVU, VT, ECU

and possibly Rutgers, Temple, USF, UAB, and/or Houston

(12-23-2020 05:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s play with an idea here:

In the early 90s the Big Ten and ACC both take a more aggressive approach to expansion.

Pitt joins Penn St in the Big Ten.

Miami, Syracuse, and BC join Florida St in the ACC.

I’ll say we get a Metro Conference/C-USA that incorporates:

USM, Tulane, Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati, WVU, VT, ECU

and possibly Rutgers, Temple, USF, UAB, and/or Houston

Love it! But I doubt leave Houston leaves the SWC until it folds.

(12-23-2020 06:08 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 05:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s play with an idea here:

In the early 90s the Big Ten and ACC both take a more aggressive approach to expansion.

Pitt joins Penn St in the Big Ten.

Miami, Syracuse, and BC join Florida St in the ACC.

I’ll say we get a Metro Conference/C-USA that incorporates:

USM, Tulane, Memphis, Louisville, Cincinnati, WVU, VT, ECU

and possibly Rutgers, Temple, USF, UAB, and/or Houston

Love it! But I doubt leave Houston leaves the SWC until it folds.

Naturally, I think the SWC would still break up and pave the way for a Big 12. The only question remains is if the PAC 10 will feel motivated to also go to 12 in the 90s? Utah and Colorado would be a possibility if Colorado was open to it (TCU/Houston takes their place in the Big 12?). If not, Utah and BYU.

How about a more aggressive SEC that gets one or more of the bigger fish: Florida State, Texas, and/or Texas A&M instead of settling for Arkansas and/or South Carolina in addition to Penn State and Pittsburgh in the Big Ten?

(12-23-2020 08:15 PM)schmolik Wrote:  How about a more aggressive SEC that gets one or more of the bigger fish: Florida State, Texas, and/or Texas A&M instead of settling for Arkansas and/or South Carolina in addition to Penn State and Pittsburgh in the Big Ten?

JR often sites that the SEC had a nuclear option and that plan was 16 w/ Oklahoma, Texas, TAMU, Arkansas, Clemson, and FSU.

Penn St had already committed to the Big Ten (11)

The Big 8 is at 7 as is the ACC, the SWC has 6; The PAC 10 is at 10.

BC, Pitt, Cuse, Miami, WVU, VT, SC, Rutgers, and Temple are all free agents.

This would have created utter chaos.

I think the ACC would be compelled to go after the eastern independents, even some with less than stellar academic reputations.

The Big Ten might also be on the prowl in the East but I think there is also going to be interest in bringing in AAU Big 8 schools.

Colorado goes to the PAC 10.

The Big 8 and SWC remnants merge.

ACC: M’land, UVA, UNC, Duke, WF, NC St, GT + Miami, SC, VT, BC, Cuse, WVU, Rutgers

Big 10: the 11 + Nebraska, Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Pitt

SWC: Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, SMU, Baylor, Houston, Rice, Tech

PAC 11: 10 + Colorado

(12-23-2020 08:41 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-23-2020 08:15 PM)schmolik Wrote:  How about a more aggressive SEC that gets one or more of the bigger fish: Florida State, Texas, and/or Texas A&M instead of settling for Arkansas and/or South Carolina in addition to Penn State and Pittsburgh in the Big Ten?

JR often sites that the SEC had a nuclear option and that plan was 16 w/ Oklahoma, Texas, TAMU, Arkansas, Clemson, and FSU.

Penn St had already committed to the Big Ten (11)

The Big 8 is at 7 as is the ACC, the SWC has 6; The PAC 10 is at 10.

BC, Pitt, Cuse, Miami, WVU, VT, SC, Rutgers, and Temple are all free agents.

This would have created utter chaos.

I think the ACC would be compelled to go after the eastern independents, even some with less than stellar academic reputations.

The Big Ten might also be on the prowl in the East but I think there is also going to be interest in bringing in AAU Big 8 schools.

Colorado goes to the PAC 10.

The Big 8 and SWC remnants merge.

ACC: M’land, UVA, UNC, Duke, WF, NC St, GT + Miami, SC, VT, BC, Cuse, WVU, Rutgers

Big 10: the 11 + Nebraska, Iowa St, Missouri, Kansas, Pitt

SWC: Kansas St, Oklahoma St, TCU, SMU, Baylor, Houston, Rice, Tech

PAC 11: 10 + Colorado

Nah. Too extreme. I like the Big Ten stopping at 12 without the western crap. How about the SEC just takes Florida State and Texas A&M and the ACC Miami, South Carolina, Boston College, and Syracuse, and Texas and Colorado in the Pac-12? The Big 8 has just 7 and the SWC just 7 (Arkansas is one of them). They can merge and create a conference of 14 with the Big 8 being the North Division and the SWC the South Division (in this case there's no Texas and Oklahoma and Nebraska would be in the same division but no Colorado). Notre Dame is still an independent. You'd have five "power" conferences and 62 members. Houston, SMU, and Rice would still be in while Utah, Louisville, Rutgers, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia would be out.

This was discussed at the ACC board

The original plan when they invited Miami was to invite Miami, Boston College, and Syracuse before Mark Warner got Virginia Tech into the ACC and Syracuse got left out (at least until the next round). After that, the Big East replaces the three with Louisville, Cincinnati, DePaul, Marquette, and South Florida (the last was a replacement to Boston College as BC was added later).

In this scenario, the original plan happens and Syracuse is in the ACC while Virginia Tech is still in the Big East. Big East men's basketball would have been way weaker had Syracuse left instead of Virginia Tech. You could argue that back then Syracuse was the "head" of the Big East in basketball (either them or UConn). When Syracuse left the Big East, it led to the Catholic 7 split. Would the Catholic 7 split have happened earlier if Syracuse had left earlier? They would have had one fewer original Big East member and UConn had just barely started FBS football. Maybe the Big East decides football isn't worth it anymore and lets Pittsburgh, UConn, Rutgers, West Virginia, and Virginia Tech go to other conferences for football. Even if the Big East kept football and were able to attract Louisville and Cincinnati, would DePaul and Marquette had considered the Big East an upgrade over Conference USA if Syracuse isn't there? Maybe if Syracuse leaves Pittsburgh starts pushing for the Big Ten's 12th slot rather than be happy with the Big East while Syracuse is still in it.

Syracuse was a founding member of the original Big East. They were one of only three original members to sponsor football (Pittsburgh and Boston College the other two). Most of the Catholic 7 don't sponsor FBS football and probably don't care much for it but they deal with it to keep Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Boston College happy. After Boston College left, they still wanted to keep Syracuse and Pittsburgh happy. Would it really have been as important to just keep Pittsburgh happy (or if Pitt got the Big Ten invite what would have been the point to keep football for a bunch of newbies that Villanova and Georgetown have little connection to)? I think Syracuse leaving the Big East could have changed the whole story.

So BE fb would be Rutgers, Pitt, WVU, VT, plus transitioning UConn. To me, the logical result would be a split as soon as the two 8-team groups qualified for their own autobids.

That split would have occurred in 2010.

I think TCU becomes the football side’s 9th member for that season for just the 2010 and 2011 seasons before joining the Big 12.

I see a potential race to grab BE football properties between the ACC and Big 12.

Pitt, WVU, VT, Louisville, and Cincinnati would be some properties they might be fighting over.

Who knows—the ACC might just preemptively crush the dreams of the Big East football spin off group by raiding in 2010, forcing the rest of the Big East to stay together.

There’s so many questions that tie back to the Great Realignment of 1989-1991 (and it’s aftershock of 1994-1996).

As we know, the 8 team ACC wasn’t as Bullish as the 10 team SEC and only expanded to 9 where the later went to 12. If the ACC was feeling more aggressive and went to 12 I have to think college football looks a lot different.

The additional 3 adds most assuredly would have come from the pool of: BC, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, VT and Miami (sorry Rutgers and Temple, your programs were in no condition to be considered and their inclusion to the BE was due to the other 6 needing some additional bodies)

I’m going to go with the scenario that Miami, BC, and Syracuse are the 3 chosen to complete a 12 team ACC. Mainly because those were the 3 original targets in 2003.

I think the fall out is that the Metro holds together, and is strengthened with an influx of football programs that missed the cut:

WVU
VT
Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
USM
Tulane
Rutgers
Temple
Pittsburgh* (fb only)

(The Big East probably picks up an A-10 school or 2, like UMass, to replace their losses)

The Metro spends the 90s and 00s as a strong tweener conference. Pitt probably does it’s best to squeeze into the Big Ten. They don’t get included in the Bowl Alliance/Coalition or BCS.

1996 ushers Houston as addition. I’m torn on whether UCF or USF or both eventually join the Metro too.

The question is does anyone in the Metro manage to distinguish themselves enough to get picked up by a BCS 5 Conference and if this happens before or after the 2010-2014 Realignment?

The Syracuse point of view of my scenario: https://www.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/...e_con.html

Assuming the scenario is BC, Cuse, and Miami to the ACC in 2004, VT would have had some great seasons in the Big East from 2005-2011 but they would have had to contend with some feisty WVU, Louisville, and Cincinnati teams in that period.

If the ACC doesn’t realize they’ve erred and made an additional expansion to admit VT and a companion as their 13th and 14th members a successful run would position them very well to join Texas A&M in the SEC in 2012.

TCU joins the Big 12 in 2012 to replace A&M. Missouri stays in the Big 12.

The Big East would still need a quick replacement for 2012 and my guess is that Temple is still that school.

Where I get stuck is ACC expansion circa 2013. They’d have UConn, Pitt, WVU, Rutgers, Cincinnati, Louisville, and USF to choose from. If the ACC feels like they need to expand that year I think it’s WVU and Pittsburgh.

If they still lose Maryland to the Big Ten the next year, then I think Louisville remains their replacement.

There’s also a B scenario, where, without VT doing the heavy lifting in the ACC, the ACC feels they need to correct their mistake and prior to 2011 they add VT and WVU to go to 14. Missouri to the SEC, Louisville to the Big 12, Rutgers & Maryland to the Big Ten, and Pitt to the ACC.

What would the Airplane Conference look like and the PAC 12 was not formed?

West.
California
Washington
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Air Force
Iowa State
Oklahoma
SMU
Texas
Houston

East:
Notre Dame
Indiana
Navy
Michigan State
UNC
Army
Penn
Pittsburgh
Yale
Penn State
Duke
Georgia Tech
West Virginia
Miami Flo.
Holy Cross
Colgate
Syracuse

PAC 12 was not formed.

WAC forms in 1962 with Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State as co-founders.

Oregon
Oregon State
Washington State
Arizona
Arizona State
BYU
New Mexico
Utah
Wyoming
Colorado State joins in 1968
I think Idaho and Montana would join this lineup.

(01-22-2021 06:54 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  What would the Airplane Conference look like and the PAC 12 was not formed?

West.
California
Washington
USC
UCLA
Stanford
Air Force
Iowa State
Oklahoma
SMU
Texas
Houston

East:
Notre Dame
Indiana
Navy
Michigan State
UNC
Army
Penn
Pittsburgh
Yale
Penn State
Duke
Georgia Tech
West Virginia
Miami Flo.
Holy Cross
Colgate
Syracuse

PAC 12 was not formed.

WAC forms in 1962 with Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State as co-founders.

Oregon
Oregon State
Washington State
Arizona
Arizona State
BYU
New Mexico
Utah
Wyoming
Colorado State joins in 1968
I think Idaho and Montana would join this lineup.

David that doesn’t even look like the proposed Airplane Conference.

It'd be nice if there were a way to prevent a specific user from posting in a thread you started.

Playing on the ACC-BE talk, let’s say that the ACC can’t get the 7th yes vote on expansion and Miami, VT, and BC all stay in the Big East.

Does the 2010-2014 realignment look radically different? Does a weaker, 9 member ACC stay united or do we see some schools weighing other options?

(01-22-2021 03:24 PM)schmolik Wrote:  The Syracuse point of view of my scenario: https://www.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/...e_con.html

I was with them up until they had Missouri going to the Big Ten instead of Nebraska. Some other quibbles:

I doubt the Big East would renege on its invite to TCU just because the conference also acquired the Big 12 remnants. I also don't know that the Big 12 wouldn't seek to rebuild instead of abandoning their separate BCS autobid.

If the ACC expands at all for 2013(ish), Pitt would be their top choice of those schools available, over Rutgers, Louisville, or UConn. And even if the ACC were to invite Rutgers, I still think Rutgers ultimately goes to the Big Ten. UConn was never an option for the Big Ten.

(01-24-2021 07:09 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(01-22-2021 03:24 PM)schmolik Wrote:  The Syracuse point of view of my scenario: https://www.syracuse.com/sports/2013/06/...e_con.html

I was with them up until they had Missouri going to the Big Ten instead of Nebraska. Some other quibbles:

I doubt the Big East would renege on its invite to TCU just because the conference also acquired the Big 12 remnants. I also don't know that the Big 12 wouldn't seek to rebuild instead of abandoning their separate BCS autobid.

If the ACC expands at all for 2013(ish), Pitt would be their top choice of those schools available, over Rutgers, Louisville, or UConn. And even if the ACC were to invite Rutgers, I still think Rutgers ultimately goes to the Big Ten. UConn was never an option for the Big Ten.

Right. Ultimately I think the only thing that changed is that:

VT joins TAMU in the SEC in 2012
Missouri stays in the Big 12
(I think the Big 12 takes a big long look at WVU and Louisville to bounce back to 12)
Pitt joins the ACC as Maryland’s replacement in 2014.