(12-08-2019 01:50 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-08-2019 01:25 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 01:59 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-04-2019 12:43 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(12-02-2019 06:38 AM)XLance Wrote:  Nebraska needs to be in a conference with Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri and Colorado in order to be relevant. Nebraska knows it and so do we.
Face it realignment as been settled for quite some time with one sticky exception........Texas.

We all know that the Big 8 will re-form as a division of the PAC/B1G alliance. Missouri can't survive in the SEC and everybody knows it, and will have to move back "home".

The placement of Texas seems to be the stumbling block.
With the Big 8 teams leaving for the PAC/B1G (with Missouri) that leaves the old SWC teams (Texas, Texas Tech, TCU and Baylor) plus West Virginia to fill the 5 vacancies for the SEC/ACC alliance.
If Texas wants their own division in the SEC then it's going to require one SEC school to move to the ACC with West Virginia.
If Texas agrees to move to the ACC with Baylor (most likely Texas choice ) that means the SEC has to accept the very un-sexy threesome of West Virginia, TCU and Texas Tech.

At this point my projection would be:
Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Kansas State to the PAC
Missouri and Iowa State to the B1G
Texas, Texas Tech, TCU and Baylor to the SEC
West Virginia and Kentucky to the ACC.


All of these moves are doable in one fell swoop, but timing is everything.

The SEC might understand Mizzou departing (although I doubt Mizzou would want to depart in the first place, but stranger things have happened). The other thing is switching out Kentucky for Baylor and TCU. From a sports standpoint it makes some sense but the presidents still control the process of admission, not athletic directors, and they'd be reluctant to admit private, non-AAU schools, even in a state that is fertile football recruiting ground. A minor point would be TAMU feeling like they're back in a revised form of the SWC. Lots of egos that need to dealt with.

I have no idea how to solve this conundrum if the goal is to enact a final realignment that restores some old rivalries.

First of all there will have to be a tweener conference created to enable the satisfying of those conference priorities. So don't think 2 leagues of 32 but rather 3 conferences of perhaps 72 which also helps to deal with the funding breaks that exist between the upper G5 and its middle. Such a number also allows the service academies an in without having to play the strongest P schools routinely, which is what they are currently trying to mostly avoid for the sake of injuries due to weight and height requirements.

So you would have to think 65 plus 3 plus the next strongest 4.

The Big 10 should focus on their AAU associations. They have 14 current schools. They should add the 9 AAU members of the PAC plus Notre Dame who might well like to be where the Cali schools were in conference and they would still have Rutgers, Maryland and Penn State for Northeastern exposure and could schedule the South as OOC games.

The SEC is at 14. If Duke and North Carolina want to stay together they can join the SEC with Virginia and Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Clemson and Florida State. Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas round the SEC out at 24.

Army, Boston College, Navy, N.C. State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Wake Forest, West Virginia

Arizona State, Air Force, Brigham Young, Oregon St, San Diego State, T.C.U., Texas Tech, Washington St.

Baylor, Central Florida, Iowa State, Kansas State, Louisville, Miami, Oklahoma State, South Florida





You could debate who the last 4 in might be but something like this is the only way to satisfy the Big 10, keep the SEC regional and profitable, and accommodate the remain current P schools and add the most worthy of the G5, while preserving the heritage of the service academies.

I really don't see any way around the tweener conference when moving to a more well defined top 2 conferences.

If keeping N.C. State with Duke and UNC is an issue then move Georgia Tech to the tweener and insert N.C. State into the SEC.

That's an extremely solid Big 10, an extremely solid SEC, and it accommodates the most worth with some debate over Houston or San Diego State but the Aztecs bring a market that the tweener needs for distribution and Houston is duplicated by Baylor, T.C.U., and Texas Tech.

But you need much less tweeking with a model like this.

I like the concept and have played with it for a while, and I just can't see how it would be good for the fans or college football in general. Spreading out the top echelon just makes it harder for fans to have an emotional attachment/dislike to an opposing team or their fan base or even have to ability to travel to an away game on a consistent basis.
Eliminating "the old college try" simply reduces collegiate football to a minor league version of the pro game were loyalties are based on the city in which you live rather that the school you attended.
If we want to preserve college football, we must keep a system where the fans are involved and that requires that the teams that play should be in proximity to enhance the experience that is unique to college sports.
The 32 team league with 3-4 conferences with 8-12 members each can save a school like Nebraska from irrelevance whereas placing them in a league that further distances them from their successful past will only hasten their demise.

Six team divisions would make it work just fine. The divisions would be regional You could play 11 conference games and 1 OOC game.

Play the 5 from your division and play 2 schools each from each of the other 3 divisions and in 3 years time you still play everyone. Your local games would be the core of your schedule and would be played annually. The rotating games would not be immediate home and home's but would rotate on the turn of the 3 year cycle.

Let's just look at the SEC:
Duke, Kentucky, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech
Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee
Alabama, Auburn, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi St., Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M

Now the Big 10:
California, U.C.L.A., Oregon, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington
Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, Utah, Wisconsin
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Northwestern
Indiana, Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

You have conference Semis and Finals

Then the 3 conference Champs are in and 1 at large school is selected.

It's very regional with 3 years playing you through your region. The networks like the at large position and the tweener conference gets in.

Calling the grouping of Arizona, Utah, Colorado, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Minnesota "regional" is a stretch. I can imagine that your tweener conference also has carries similar stretch marks too!

(12-07-2019 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:06 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 05:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 03:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Legit question: if the SEC called up Florida St and Clemson regarding joining how many seconds would it take for the presidents to say yes?

If there was no GOR in place for the ACC then I'd think they'd be in.

They had the opportunity the leave at the time of Maryland's departure but chose instead to sign the GOR.

No they didn't have a chance to leave. They were actually announced to the SEC on the ESPN crawler, but ESPN then had second thoughts with regards to possibly missing out on Notre Dame if the ACC lost its football first schools. So what allegedly happened was the ESPN pulled those two back from the SEC which was subsequently promised maximum coverage with the opening of the SECN. So they weren't free to leave if ESPN essentially refuses to pay the SEC to take them. The subsequent GOR was signed because they had no other options.

As to Muskie's question all I can say is that both South Carolina and Florida presidents were quite willing to have them in the SEC. The reason is because with expansion both fear one day not being able to schedule their biggest rivals as OOC games and both schools base their donation requirements on the ability to obtain away tickets to those annual rivalries. So if they were in the SEC and particularly if they were in the same division, those games would never potentially be threatened again. F.S.U. was backed by Florida in '91, and Slive knowing that they would both be backed by their rivals again asked that the presidents agree to satisfy the 2 new markets clause of the SEC's contract with ESPN so that with the additions of A&M and Mizzou we could renegotiate our value as a whole. But Clemson and Florida State were certainly alive as #15 & #16 after an opportunity to pick up a North Carolina and Virginia school fell through. And Slive had promised no restrictions on those 2 or any other except that they must add to the bottom line. So I'd have to say that we would very likely have taken them if we had been paid accordingly for them.

That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

(12-10-2019 03:48 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:06 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 05:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 03:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Legit question: if the SEC called up Florida St and Clemson regarding joining how many seconds would it take for the presidents to say yes?

If there was no GOR in place for the ACC then I'd think they'd be in.

They had the opportunity the leave at the time of Maryland's departure but chose instead to sign the GOR.

No they didn't have a chance to leave. They were actually announced to the SEC on the ESPN crawler, but ESPN then had second thoughts with regards to possibly missing out on Notre Dame if the ACC lost its football first schools. So what allegedly happened was the ESPN pulled those two back from the SEC which was subsequently promised maximum coverage with the opening of the SECN. So they weren't free to leave if ESPN essentially refuses to pay the SEC to take them. The subsequent GOR was signed because they had no other options.

As to Muskie's question all I can say is that both South Carolina and Florida presidents were quite willing to have them in the SEC. The reason is because with expansion both fear one day not being able to schedule their biggest rivals as OOC games and both schools base their donation requirements on the ability to obtain away tickets to those annual rivalries. So if they were in the SEC and particularly if they were in the same division, those games would never potentially be threatened again. F.S.U. was backed by Florida in '91, and Slive knowing that they would both be backed by their rivals again asked that the presidents agree to satisfy the 2 new markets clause of the SEC's contract with ESPN so that with the additions of A&M and Mizzou we could renegotiate our value as a whole. But Clemson and Florida State were certainly alive as #15 & #16 after an opportunity to pick up a North Carolina and Virginia school fell through. And Slive had promised no restrictions on those 2 or any other except that they must add to the bottom line. So I'd have to say that we would very likely have taken them if we had been paid accordingly for them.

That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

.


There was no opportunity for ESPN to bid.

ND re-upped with NBC in 2013 on a ten year deal (2015-2025) after an 18 month negotiation without opening up the contract to outside bidders.

In fact, ND has never opened the bidding up to others since originally signing the contract with NBC in 1991.

ND is pretty happy with NBC, including the fact (believe it or not) that it is an OTA network.

Any links for the idea that ESPN was worried about ND and put a stop to Clemson and Florida State leaving the ACC? I have never seen that.


https://ndsmcobserver.com/2013/04/notre-...d-tv-deal/

(12-10-2019 09:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 03:48 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:06 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 05:51 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  If there was no GOR in place for the ACC then I'd think they'd be in.

They had the opportunity the leave at the time of Maryland's departure but chose instead to sign the GOR.

No they didn't have a chance to leave. They were actually announced to the SEC on the ESPN crawler, but ESPN then had second thoughts with regards to possibly missing out on Notre Dame if the ACC lost its football first schools. So what allegedly happened was the ESPN pulled those two back from the SEC which was subsequently promised maximum coverage with the opening of the SECN. So they weren't free to leave if ESPN essentially refuses to pay the SEC to take them. The subsequent GOR was signed because they had no other options.

As to Muskie's question all I can say is that both South Carolina and Florida presidents were quite willing to have them in the SEC. The reason is because with expansion both fear one day not being able to schedule their biggest rivals as OOC games and both schools base their donation requirements on the ability to obtain away tickets to those annual rivalries. So if they were in the SEC and particularly if they were in the same division, those games would never potentially be threatened again. F.S.U. was backed by Florida in '91, and Slive knowing that they would both be backed by their rivals again asked that the presidents agree to satisfy the 2 new markets clause of the SEC's contract with ESPN so that with the additions of A&M and Mizzou we could renegotiate our value as a whole. But Clemson and Florida State were certainly alive as #15 & #16 after an opportunity to pick up a North Carolina and Virginia school fell through. And Slive had promised no restrictions on those 2 or any other except that they must add to the bottom line. So I'd have to say that we would very likely have taken them if we had been paid accordingly for them.

That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

.


There was no opportunity for ESPN to bid.

ND re-upped with NBC in 2013 on a ten year deal (2015-2025) after an 18 month negotiation without opening up the contract to outside bidders.

In fact, ND has never opened the bidding up to others since originally signing the contract with NBC in 1991.

ND is pretty happy with NBC, including the fact (believe it or not) that it is an OTA network.

Any links for the idea that ESPN was worried about ND and put a stop to Clemson and Florida State leaving the ACC? I have never seen that.


https://ndsmcobserver.com/2013/04/notre-...d-tv-deal/

Like the Masters and CBS. The people making the decisions have concerns greater than the maximum revenue possible. How your story is told and the events portrayed matters.

(12-10-2019 10:46 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 09:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 03:48 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:06 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  They had the opportunity the leave at the time of Maryland's departure but chose instead to sign the GOR.

No they didn't have a chance to leave. They were actually announced to the SEC on the ESPN crawler, but ESPN then had second thoughts with regards to possibly missing out on Notre Dame if the ACC lost its football first schools. So what allegedly happened was the ESPN pulled those two back from the SEC which was subsequently promised maximum coverage with the opening of the SECN. So they weren't free to leave if ESPN essentially refuses to pay the SEC to take them. The subsequent GOR was signed because they had no other options.

As to Muskie's question all I can say is that both South Carolina and Florida presidents were quite willing to have them in the SEC. The reason is because with expansion both fear one day not being able to schedule their biggest rivals as OOC games and both schools base their donation requirements on the ability to obtain away tickets to those annual rivalries. So if they were in the SEC and particularly if they were in the same division, those games would never potentially be threatened again. F.S.U. was backed by Florida in '91, and Slive knowing that they would both be backed by their rivals again asked that the presidents agree to satisfy the 2 new markets clause of the SEC's contract with ESPN so that with the additions of A&M and Mizzou we could renegotiate our value as a whole. But Clemson and Florida State were certainly alive as #15 & #16 after an opportunity to pick up a North Carolina and Virginia school fell through. And Slive had promised no restrictions on those 2 or any other except that they must add to the bottom line. So I'd have to say that we would very likely have taken them if we had been paid accordingly for them.

That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

.


There was no opportunity for ESPN to bid.

ND re-upped with NBC in 2013 on a ten year deal (2015-2025) after an 18 month negotiation without opening up the contract to outside bidders.

In fact, ND has never opened the bidding up to others since originally signing the contract with NBC in 1991.

ND is pretty happy with NBC, including the fact (believe it or not) that it is an OTA network.

Any links for the idea that ESPN was worried about ND and put a stop to Clemson and Florida State leaving the ACC? I have never seen that.


https://ndsmcobserver.com/2013/04/notre-...d-tv-deal/

Like the Masters and CBS. The people making the decisions have concerns greater than the maximum revenue possible. How your story is told and the events portrayed matters.

Very true. Maximizing TV revenues is simply not the driving force for ND's moves as it is with a lot of other schools.

If it were, ND would either be in the Big Ten or would have put its NBC contract out on the open market long ago.

(12-11-2019 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:46 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 09:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 03:48 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(12-07-2019 06:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  No they didn't have a chance to leave. They were actually announced to the SEC on the ESPN crawler, but ESPN then had second thoughts with regards to possibly missing out on Notre Dame if the ACC lost its football first schools. So what allegedly happened was the ESPN pulled those two back from the SEC which was subsequently promised maximum coverage with the opening of the SECN. So they weren't free to leave if ESPN essentially refuses to pay the SEC to take them. The subsequent GOR was signed because they had no other options.

As to Muskie's question all I can say is that both South Carolina and Florida presidents were quite willing to have them in the SEC. The reason is because with expansion both fear one day not being able to schedule their biggest rivals as OOC games and both schools base their donation requirements on the ability to obtain away tickets to those annual rivalries. So if they were in the SEC and particularly if they were in the same division, those games would never potentially be threatened again. F.S.U. was backed by Florida in '91, and Slive knowing that they would both be backed by their rivals again asked that the presidents agree to satisfy the 2 new markets clause of the SEC's contract with ESPN so that with the additions of A&M and Mizzou we could renegotiate our value as a whole. But Clemson and Florida State were certainly alive as #15 & #16 after an opportunity to pick up a North Carolina and Virginia school fell through. And Slive had promised no restrictions on those 2 or any other except that they must add to the bottom line. So I'd have to say that we would very likely have taken them if we had been paid accordingly for them.

That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

.


There was no opportunity for ESPN to bid.

ND re-upped with NBC in 2013 on a ten year deal (2015-2025) after an 18 month negotiation without opening up the contract to outside bidders.

In fact, ND has never opened the bidding up to others since originally signing the contract with NBC in 1991.

ND is pretty happy with NBC, including the fact (believe it or not) that it is an OTA network.

Any links for the idea that ESPN was worried about ND and put a stop to Clemson and Florida State leaving the ACC? I have never seen that.


https://ndsmcobserver.com/2013/04/notre-...d-tv-deal/

Like the Masters and CBS. The people making the decisions have concerns greater than the maximum revenue possible. How your story is told and the events portrayed matters.

Very true. Maximizing TV revenues is simply not the driving force for ND's moves as it is with a lot of other schools.

If it were, ND would either be in the Big Ten or would have put its NBC contract out on the open market long ago.

Notre Dame, like college football in general, is facing some tough decisions.
Did you notice the sparse crowd at this year's Stanford game in Palo Alto?

(12-12-2019 06:13 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(12-11-2019 12:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 10:46 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 09:15 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(12-10-2019 03:48 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  That being the case JR, why didn't ESPN outbid NBC for its Notre Dame coverage?? If ESPN will leave Irish football independence alone, I seriously doubt that ND would turn down that offer.

.


There was no opportunity for ESPN to bid.

ND re-upped with NBC in 2013 on a ten year deal (2015-2025) after an 18 month negotiation without opening up the contract to outside bidders.

In fact, ND has never opened the bidding up to others since originally signing the contract with NBC in 1991.

ND is pretty happy with NBC, including the fact (believe it or not) that it is an OTA network.

Any links for the idea that ESPN was worried about ND and put a stop to Clemson and Florida State leaving the ACC? I have never seen that.


https://ndsmcobserver.com/2013/04/notre-...d-tv-deal/

Like the Masters and CBS. The people making the decisions have concerns greater than the maximum revenue possible. How your story is told and the events portrayed matters.

Very true. Maximizing TV revenues is simply not the driving force for ND's moves as it is with a lot of other schools.

If it were, ND would either be in the Big Ten or would have put its NBC contract out on the open market long ago.

Notre Dame, like college football in general, is facing some tough decisions.
Did you notice the sparse crowd at this year's Stanford game in Palo Alto?

Yes. Stanford had a ****** season and it was raining like crazy.