(04-19-2013 10:55 PM)USAFMEDIC Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 10:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 09:15 PM)miko33 Wrote:  The age of superconferences will begin within 5 years. That is my prediction, and it seems that a number of the Big10 schools are beginning to arrange their future OOC schedules around 2016 and beyond with ND, Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse. Case in point, PSU has had zero desire to play Pitt since 2000. Now, it appears that PSU has changed on that stance. Why? Because they need to expand their eastern presence and that when superconferences become a reality the B1G will need to deepen those bonds with the more traditional eastern FB teams, which ND is included in due to their "eastern feel". The link below is merely the beginning of a progression of steps that will be occurring in within the next 5 years.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11165/1153636-100-2.stm

I would rather see Syracuse and Pitt in the Big 10 than in the SEC. And I would rather see Florida State and Georgia Tech in the SEC than in the Big 10. But most of all I would rather they just all stay in the ACC. If we must get to 16 each in 4 conferences then let's agree how best to divide the one in the middle of the country and end this thing.

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Texas to the PAC.
Kansas and Iowa State to the Big 10.
Baylor and Oklahoma to the SEC.
Connecticut and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets contiguous states. The SEC gets one national brand and a good program close enough to Dallas/Ft.Worth. The Big 10 gets 1 national brand and two AAU schools. The PAC gets one national brand in Texas a West Texas school as a bridge, and two central time zone states with two strong football programs.

I think there is a state law prohibiting separation of these two Okie schools. Someone else should be able to clarify.

There is no law requiring the two Oklahoma schools to be in the same conference. Contrary to what some believe, it is not in the state constitution, either.

While governor, OU president David Boren was instrumental in establishing the verterinary school at OSU. Mrs. Boren is a graduate of OSU. OSU president Burns Hargis got his law degree from OU. Many Oklahomans describe it as a family relationship.

(04-19-2013 10:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 09:15 PM)miko33 Wrote:  The age of superconferences will begin within 5 years. That is my prediction, and it seems that a number of the Big10 schools are beginning to arrange their future OOC schedules around 2016 and beyond with ND, Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse. Case in point, PSU has had zero desire to play Pitt since 2000. Now, it appears that PSU has changed on that stance. Why? Because they need to expand their eastern presence and that when superconferences become a reality the B1G will need to deepen those bonds with the more traditional eastern FB teams, which ND is included in due to their "eastern feel". The link below is merely the beginning of a progression of steps that will be occurring in within the next 5 years.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11165/1153636-100-2.stm

I would rather see Syracuse and Pitt in the Big 10 than in the SEC. And I would rather see Florida State and Georgia Tech in the SEC than in the Big 10. But most of all I would rather they just all stay in the ACC. If we must get to 16 each in 4 conferences then let's agree how best to divide the one in the middle of the country and end this thing.

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Texas to the PAC.
Kansas and Iowa State to the Big 10.
Baylor and Oklahoma to the SEC.
Connecticut and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets contiguous states. The SEC gets one national brand and a good program close enough to Dallas/Ft.Worth. The Big 10 gets 1 national brand and two AAU schools. The PAC gets one national brand in Texas a West Texas school as a bridge, and two central time zone states with two strong football programs.

Naw, the magic number is 18.

The Pac takes Texas, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU

B1G takes UVA, UNC, Duke, GT

SEC takes VT, NC St, FSU, Baylor

ACC/Big XII/AAC merger (A.K.A. The Big 16)

WF, BC, Cuse, Pitt, UofL, ISU, TCU, Cincy, WVU, Clemson, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Miami, UConn, Temple, Memphis.

Thats your Big Four right there. Real consolidation of power.

I think TCU would be in the SEC before Baylor because of Dallas recruiting.

I don't know what you do with Duke because their football stadium isn't B1G or SEC level. Its acceptable for the ACC though.

The problem for the B1G is if they move to 16 or even beyond that to 18 or 20 is they won't be able to play a solid interdivisional schedule.

I feel like its getting late in the game for the B1G or SEC to make any move in advance of the CFP contract. The B1G accomplished its mission of adding another football power in Nebraska plus big east coast markets in Rutgers and Maryland. The SEC brought it a big time school from Texas.

The ACC and B12 still control core areas. The ACC still controls NC/VA with a significant presence in the Northeast while the B12 still has KS/OK with a significant presence in Texas. To outsiders they still look like AQ conferences.

It's amazing how many experts on big time football there are from small schools that either have no football, or don't play football in one of the Big 5 conferences...

(04-20-2013 09:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's amazing how many experts on big time football there are from small schools that either have no football, or don't play football in one of the Big 5 conferences...

Are you talking about guys like Mike Slive (Dartmouth), Larry Scott (Harvard), and Bob Bowlsby (Moorhead State), or posters in this thread.

(04-20-2013 09:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's amazing how many experts on big time football there are from small schools that either have no football, or don't play football in one of the Big 5 conferences...

Being a fan of a school that plays in a former BCS conference makes you more qualified to speak on college football?

Its nice to see Penn St and Pitt playing again. Its nice to see rivalries (especially in-state ones) renewed. Realignment has been destroying too many good games.

(06-15-2011 04:23 AM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  My prediction? Pain

After all these years, it's still one of the classic-best lines in Hollywood history.

(06-15-2011 12:40 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  Potential adds:

Big Ten: Rutgers, Maryland
SEC: TCU/TAMU
ACC: Syracuse

4 out of 5 wasn't too shabby.

(06-15-2011 03:32 AM)Star City Hokie Wrote:  I think Missouri would get invited to the Big 10 before Pittsburgh.

That would give them the flagship school of a state that includes St. Louis and Kansas City versus Pittsburgh who is already covered in the area somewhat by Penn St.

No one can predict conference membership far into the future.

(04-19-2013 09:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 11:05 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I think its impossible to know whats going to happen 5,10, or 15 years down the road. We may see 5 more teams added to the BCS ranks(3 BE, 2 B12) and thats the end of expansion forever. We just might end up seeing 4-5 16 team leagues. Or this could go a different route if the Big 6 leaves forms its own division within the NCAA and leaves the rest of the FBS in the dust. Hell what about a playoff forces some leagues to split in half and adds some nonaq like schools so they could get more schools into a playoff. The paradigm always changes. Right now it is about the money, but who knows what the next paradigm is.

Based upon demographic and economic trends the next paradigm is the driving force today, survival.

The next paradigm shift should be to realize that survival is based upon strength in numbers and rather than trying to outdo each other in terms of conference pride in who gets the most bucks, the major conferences join forces in 2024 and bargain all as one unit for 2026 and beyond.

Don't see it happening though.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-20-2013 01:35 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  No one can predict conference membership far into the future.

Miko sure didn't predict well. Miko is heading for a 1 for 4 finish at this point.

However, it appears Kit-Cat is pretty good at it (4 for 5 so far). Ironically, this thread was apparently bumped to give Kit-Cat a hard time over missing one of his 5 picks !

(04-20-2013 01:50 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 09:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 11:05 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I think its impossible to know whats going to happen 5,10, or 15 years down the road. We may see 5 more teams added to the BCS ranks(3 BE, 2 B12) and thats the end of expansion forever. We just might end up seeing 4-5 16 team leagues. Or this could go a different route if the Big 6 leaves forms its own division within the NCAA and leaves the rest of the FBS in the dust. Hell what about a playoff forces some leagues to split in half and adds some nonaq like schools so they could get more schools into a playoff. The paradigm always changes. Right now it is about the money, but who knows what the next paradigm is.

Based upon demographic and economic trends the next paradigm is the driving force today, survival.

The next paradigm shift should be to realize that survival is based upon strength in numbers and rather than trying to outdo each other in terms of conference pride in who gets the most bucks, the major conferences join forces in 2024 and bargain all as one unit for 2026 and beyond.

Don't see it happening though.

Cheers,
Neil

I would be all for that Neil. We duplicate too much in expenses already and no people who struggle against themselves will have self determination. (A paraphrase of Lincoln quoting scripture.)

(04-20-2013 10:10 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(04-20-2013 09:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's amazing how many experts on big time football there are from small schools that either have no football, or don't play football in one of the Big 5 conferences...

Are you talking about guys like Mike Slive (Dartmouth), Larry Scott (Harvard), and Bob Bowlsby (Moorhead State), or posters in this thread.

Either way, being from one of the Big 5 conferences doesn't make you any more an expert than someone who isn't.

PSU already plays 6-7 home games a year in PA.

How is scheduling a game against Pitt "expanding their Eastern presence"?

(04-20-2013 04:04 PM)OrangeXtreme Wrote:  PSU already plays 6-7 home games a year in PA.

How is scheduling a game against Pitt "expanding their Eastern presence"?

The argument against you:
*Because it beats the heck out of Iowa, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Minn. in terms of being in the east.

The argument for you:
*PSU already plays 6-7 home games in CENTRAL PA. How does playing a game against Pitt in WESTERN PA inrease their EASTERN exposure?

Unrelated note: If PSU's AD wasn't terrible, then PSU would play a rotating schedule of SU and Pitt every year.

(04-20-2013 01:50 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 09:29 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 11:05 PM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  I think its impossible to know whats going to happen 5,10, or 15 years down the road. We may see 5 more teams added to the BCS ranks(3 BE, 2 B12) and thats the end of expansion forever. We just might end up seeing 4-5 16 team leagues. Or this could go a different route if the Big 6 leaves forms its own division within the NCAA and leaves the rest of the FBS in the dust. Hell what about a playoff forces some leagues to split in half and adds some nonaq like schools so they could get more schools into a playoff. The paradigm always changes. Right now it is about the money, but who knows what the next paradigm is.

Based upon demographic and economic trends the next paradigm is the driving force today, survival.

The next paradigm shift should be to realize that survival is based upon strength in numbers and rather than trying to outdo each other in terms of conference pride in who gets the most bucks, the major conferences join forces in 2024 and bargain all as one unit for 2026 and beyond.

Don't see it happening though.

Cheers,
Neil

Divide et impera

(04-20-2013 03:07 PM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(04-20-2013 10:10 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(04-20-2013 09:31 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  It's amazing how many experts on big time football there are from small schools that either have no football, or don't play football in one of the Big 5 conferences...

Are you talking about guys like Mike Slive (Dartmouth), Larry Scott (Harvard), and Bob Bowlsby (Moorhead State), or posters in this thread.

Either way, being from one of the Big 5 conferences doesn't make you any more an expert than someone who isn't.

It tends to make you more of an expert on your conference than those who've never been a part of it...

(04-20-2013 07:16 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(04-19-2013 10:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(06-14-2011 09:15 PM)miko33 Wrote:  The age of superconferences will begin within 5 years. That is my prediction, and it seems that a number of the Big10 schools are beginning to arrange their future OOC schedules around 2016 and beyond with ND, Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse. Case in point, PSU has had zero desire to play Pitt since 2000. Now, it appears that PSU has changed on that stance. Why? Because they need to expand their eastern presence and that when superconferences become a reality the B1G will need to deepen those bonds with the more traditional eastern FB teams, which ND is included in due to their "eastern feel". The link below is merely the beginning of a progression of steps that will be occurring in within the next 5 years.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11165/1153636-100-2.stm

I would rather see Syracuse and Pitt in the Big 10 than in the SEC. And I would rather see Florida State and Georgia Tech in the SEC than in the Big 10. But most of all I would rather they just all stay in the ACC. If we must get to 16 each in 4 conferences then let's agree how best to divide the one in the middle of the country and end this thing.

Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech and Texas to the PAC.
Kansas and Iowa State to the Big 10.
Baylor and Oklahoma to the SEC.
Connecticut and West Virginia to the ACC.

The ACC gets contiguous states. The SEC gets one national brand and a good program close enough to Dallas/Ft.Worth. The Big 10 gets 1 national brand and two AAU schools. The PAC gets one national brand in Texas a West Texas school as a bridge, and two central time zone states with two strong football programs.

Naw, the magic number is 18.

The Pac takes Texas, Tech, OU, OSU, KU, KSU

B1G takes UVA, UNC, Duke, GT

SEC takes VT, NC St, FSU, Baylor

ACC/Big XII/AAC merger (A.K.A. The Big 16)

WF, BC, Cuse, Pitt, UofL, ISU, TCU, Cincy, WVU, Clemson, USF, UCF, Houston, SMU, Miami, UConn, Temple, Memphis.

Thats your Big Four right there. Real consolidation of power.

From a Clemson perspective, this would be tantamount to football extinction. Outside of WVU and possibly Miami, not a natural rival in this scenario. Numerous near zero fan interest match ups (BC, WF, UCONN, Temple, & Memphis). Several match ups that might be interesting the first few go rounds (Cuse, Pitt, ISU, Cincy, UofL, Houston, USF, UCF, TCU, SMU) but nothing that I see that would hold long term interest for Clemson fans (maybe UofL). I would foresee our recruiting taking a massive nose dive and the travel would be beyond horrendous. The recruiting aspect would make it near to impossible for us to be competitive with our in-state SEC rival (South Carolina). In this scenario I would actively push for and support Clemson moving from BCS to FCS, rejoining the Southern Conference, and dropping the annual South Carolina game.