(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 12:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  96 pages into this thread, speculation about almost every angle and Big 12 school, and what does the Big 12 have that would bring value to the SEC? Oklahoma & Texas and to a lesser extent Kansas.

If the SEC landed Oklahoma and Texas they will have added to the two highest content value schools left in realignment.

What should we do to get them if they can't leave little brothers behind? Take little brother.

Oklahoma State, choose one (Baylor or Texas Tech) would move us to 18 and 3 divisions of 6. If Texas is not an option then OU, KU, OSU, KState might (I said might) be workable.

And yes, I support just OU with OSU if necessary. Yes that duplicates a small market, but with two schools which are among the top 30 grossing schools in the nation, and with two schools that could each play an annual game in Dallas along with A&M making the Big D SEC country.

And JR this brings us back to where we have clashed before.
It does not seem as if ANYBODY wants to go beyond 16. I think that that is a given no matter how attractive the 3 x 6 model appears.
There is no doubt that the folks at ESPN would be doing cartwheels if Oklahoma and Texas would join the SEC for a multitude of reasons (mostly $$$$ signs). But and that's a big BUT Oklahoma State had to be a part, it is my understanding that it is possible that a SEC east team may be "transferred" into the ACC as #16 provided that Notre Dame would be #15. Cast in stone? Nope, just one of the multitudes of scenarios that have been discussed between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.
Does it make sense for the Texas ego? Heck no, but it does make sense on so many levels, especially for the fans. What does not make sense, is Texas playing conference games on the east coast when A&M, Oklahoma, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma State are so close.

1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 12:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  96 pages into this thread, speculation about almost every angle and Big 12 school, and what does the Big 12 have that would bring value to the SEC? Oklahoma & Texas and to a lesser extent Kansas.

If the SEC landed Oklahoma and Texas they will have added to the two highest content value schools left in realignment.

What should we do to get them if they can't leave little brothers behind? Take little brother.

Oklahoma State, choose one (Baylor or Texas Tech) would move us to 18 and 3 divisions of 6. If Texas is not an option then OU, KU, OSU, KState might (I said might) be workable.

And yes, I support just OU with OSU if necessary. Yes that duplicates a small market, but with two schools which are among the top 30 grossing schools in the nation, and with two schools that could each play an annual game in Dallas along with A&M making the Big D SEC country.

And JR this brings us back to where we have clashed before.
It does not seem as if ANYBODY wants to go beyond 16. I think that that is a given no matter how attractive the 3 x 6 model appears.
There is no doubt that the folks at ESPN would be doing cartwheels if Oklahoma and Texas would join the SEC for a multitude of reasons (mostly $$$$ signs). But and that's a big BUT Oklahoma State had to be a part, it is my understanding that it is possible that a SEC east team may be "transferred" into the ACC as #16 provided that Notre Dame would be #15. Cast in stone? Nope, just one of the multitudes of scenarios that have been discussed between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.
Does it make sense for the Texas ego? Heck no, but it does make sense on so many levels, especially for the fans. What does not make sense, is Texas playing conference games on the east coast when A&M, Oklahoma, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma State are so close.

1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 12:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 11:15 PM)JRsec Wrote:  96 pages into this thread, speculation about almost every angle and Big 12 school, and what does the Big 12 have that would bring value to the SEC? Oklahoma & Texas and to a lesser extent Kansas.

If the SEC landed Oklahoma and Texas they will have added to the two highest content value schools left in realignment.

What should we do to get them if they can't leave little brothers behind? Take little brother.

Oklahoma State, choose one (Baylor or Texas Tech) would move us to 18 and 3 divisions of 6. If Texas is not an option then OU, KU, OSU, KState might (I said might) be workable.

And yes, I support just OU with OSU if necessary. Yes that duplicates a small market, but with two schools which are among the top 30 grossing schools in the nation, and with two schools that could each play an annual game in Dallas along with A&M making the Big D SEC country.

And JR this brings us back to where we have clashed before.
It does not seem as if ANYBODY wants to go beyond 16. I think that that is a given no matter how attractive the 3 x 6 model appears.
There is no doubt that the folks at ESPN would be doing cartwheels if Oklahoma and Texas would join the SEC for a multitude of reasons (mostly $$$$ signs). But and that's a big BUT Oklahoma State had to be a part, it is my understanding that it is possible that a SEC east team may be "transferred" into the ACC as #16 provided that Notre Dame would be #15. Cast in stone? Nope, just one of the multitudes of scenarios that have been discussed between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.
Does it make sense for the Texas ego? Heck no, but it does make sense on so many levels, especially for the fans. What does not make sense, is Texas playing conference games on the east coast when A&M, Oklahoma, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma State are so close.

1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 12:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  And JR this brings us back to where we have clashed before.
It does not seem as if ANYBODY wants to go beyond 16. I think that that is a given no matter how attractive the 3 x 6 model appears.
There is no doubt that the folks at ESPN would be doing cartwheels if Oklahoma and Texas would join the SEC for a multitude of reasons (mostly $$$$ signs). But and that's a big BUT Oklahoma State had to be a part, it is my understanding that it is possible that a SEC east team may be "transferred" into the ACC as #16 provided that Notre Dame would be #15. Cast in stone? Nope, just one of the multitudes of scenarios that have been discussed between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.
Does it make sense for the Texas ego? Heck no, but it does make sense on so many levels, especially for the fans. What does not make sense, is Texas playing conference games on the east coast when A&M, Oklahoma, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma State are so close.

1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Kansas would offer Kentucky someone to play in round ball. That's why a UNC & Duke swoop wouldn't be bad if that's what it would take to get into North Carolina.

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 12:18 PM)XLance Wrote:  And JR this brings us back to where we have clashed before.
It does not seem as if ANYBODY wants to go beyond 16. I think that that is a given no matter how attractive the 3 x 6 model appears.
There is no doubt that the folks at ESPN would be doing cartwheels if Oklahoma and Texas would join the SEC for a multitude of reasons (mostly $$$$ signs). But and that's a big BUT Oklahoma State had to be a part, it is my understanding that it is possible that a SEC east team may be "transferred" into the ACC as #16 provided that Notre Dame would be #15. Cast in stone? Nope, just one of the multitudes of scenarios that have been discussed between the ACC, SEC and ESPN.
Does it make sense for the Texas ego? Heck no, but it does make sense on so many levels, especially for the fans. What does not make sense, is Texas playing conference games on the east coast when A&M, Oklahoma, LSU, Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma State are so close.

1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Would be a mutual benefit type deal. SEC gets Texas, bringing along Oklahoma and their baggage. If the B1G expanded west, Mizzou and kansas would be THE pair to go after IMO. Get value added of a top rivalry (Border War), plus reignite series with Nebraska.

It would be a net positive for both, and the numbers would work perfectly. B1G gets 2 new states with growing populations, AAU schools, rivalries, extended footprints. SEC would get a new state, 2 crown jewels, a pretty decent baggage school, capture the entire state of Texas for real, and some major brands.

Longhorn network problems aside, this would be a perfect exclamation point to realignment. But I doubt it happens...as much as I think it would be awesome.

(10-23-2015 09:01 AM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 01:40 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  1. I don't see why anyone would want to leave the SEC right now.

2. The only member of the SEC East(other than Mizzou) that is not a founding member is South Carolina. Each of the Eastern schools fit into the SEC perfectly.

3. They make more money in the SEC.

This is why I would say that if the ACC is looking for expansion options then looking to the Midwest/Texas is the way to go. I can understand the reasons for not wanting WVU or UConn, but snagging an SEC team is just not an option.

I'd be looking at Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor...they all fit the ACC profile to one extent or the other.

It will be interesting if ND comes along, but I don't think it's going to happen soon.

I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Would be a mutual benefit type deal. SEC gets Texas, bringing along Oklahoma and their baggage. If the B1G expanded west, Mizzou and kansas would be THE pair to go after IMO. Get value added of a top rivalry (Border War), plus reignite series with Nebraska.

It would be a net positive for both, and the numbers would work perfectly. B1G gets 2 new states with growing populations, AAU schools, rivalries, extended footprints. SEC would get a new state, 2 crown jewels, a pretty decent baggage school, capture the entire state of Texas for real, and some major brands.

Longhorn network problems aside, this would be a perfect exclamation point to realignment. But I doubt it happens...as much as I think it would be awesome.

I agree with you that the bottom line for both would be improved and that it would be a satisfactory way to conclude realignment. I also agree it likely won't happen that way.

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 09:01 AM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 07:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  I don't see anyone wanting to leave the SEC either, BUT if ESPN had the opportunity to move Texas and Oklahoma into the SEC and the price was taking in Oklahoma State too, somebody in the SEC East might just be encouraged to compromise for the betterment of college football (ESPN) and you can bet that they would be well compensated.

Who knows? It's all speculation at this point. There are so many moving parts that it has been difficult to reach consensus. No school or conference wants to really give up anything while getting something and in the mean time do whatever without losing face.

I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Would be a mutual benefit type deal. SEC gets Texas, bringing along Oklahoma and their baggage. If the B1G expanded west, Mizzou and kansas would be THE pair to go after IMO. Get value added of a top rivalry (Border War), plus reignite series with Nebraska.

It would be a net positive for both, and the numbers would work perfectly. B1G gets 2 new states with growing populations, AAU schools, rivalries, extended footprints. SEC would get a new state, 2 crown jewels, a pretty decent baggage school, capture the entire state of Texas for real, and some major brands.

Longhorn network problems aside, this would be a perfect exclamation point to realignment. But I doubt it happens...as much as I think it would be awesome.

I agree with you that the bottom line for both would be improved and that it would be a satisfactory way to conclude realignment. I also agree it likely won't happen that way.

Occam's razor.

(10-23-2015 04:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 09:01 AM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 04:18 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  I think I could see what you are saying as this. OU, UT and Ok St. join SEC. Mizzou moves to Big Ten. Kansas leaves for Big10. That leaves the rest of the Big12 in pieces like the former BigEast. That would mean that the Big12 would no longer be a viable option for WVU. I bet they would move to the AAC since there is no real difference at that point.

If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Would be a mutual benefit type deal. SEC gets Texas, bringing along Oklahoma and their baggage. If the B1G expanded west, Mizzou and kansas would be THE pair to go after IMO. Get value added of a top rivalry (Border War), plus reignite series with Nebraska.

It would be a net positive for both, and the numbers would work perfectly. B1G gets 2 new states with growing populations, AAU schools, rivalries, extended footprints. SEC would get a new state, 2 crown jewels, a pretty decent baggage school, capture the entire state of Texas for real, and some major brands.

Longhorn network problems aside, this would be a perfect exclamation point to realignment. But I doubt it happens...as much as I think it would be awesome.

I agree with you that the bottom line for both would be improved and that it would be a satisfactory way to conclude realignment. I also agree it likely won't happen that way.

Occam's razor.

To put this behind us and let the sport heal, Occam would be welcomed!

(10-23-2015 05:30 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 04:43 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 09:01 AM)5thTiger Wrote:  

(10-22-2015 08:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If Oklahoma State is the price for Texas and Oklahoma why give up Missouri at all? Just add either Kansas, or Kansas State, or West Virginia and call it a day. Why give up 8 million when you can add 3 million more? Why would we want to give up 8 million just so the numbers work out evenly? A new market and a brand are a new market and a brand. Besides, Kansas adds what the SEC really needs, somebody that is easier to beat than Vanderbilt.

Would be a mutual benefit type deal. SEC gets Texas, bringing along Oklahoma and their baggage. If the B1G expanded west, Mizzou and kansas would be THE pair to go after IMO. Get value added of a top rivalry (Border War), plus reignite series with Nebraska.

It would be a net positive for both, and the numbers would work perfectly. B1G gets 2 new states with growing populations, AAU schools, rivalries, extended footprints. SEC would get a new state, 2 crown jewels, a pretty decent baggage school, capture the entire state of Texas for real, and some major brands.

Longhorn network problems aside, this would be a perfect exclamation point to realignment. But I doubt it happens...as much as I think it would be awesome.

I agree with you that the bottom line for both would be improved and that it would be a satisfactory way to conclude realignment. I also agree it likely won't happen that way.

Occam's razor.

To put this behind us and let the sport heal, Occam would be welcomed!

You are absolutely right JR. Most fans just want stability. Will their rivalries be preserved? Will they know who is in their conference and why? Will they have a decent home schedule every year, or will they have to endure poor home schedules every other year?.
The average fan is tired, financially strapped, and unhappy.

Let's posit a hypothetical that heretofore I do no believe has been put forth anywhere on any message boards that I've read. But what if Missouri to the SEC was a preservation move by ESPN, not a market enhancement move as it has been sold. What if ESPN was worried that Oklahoma might be a target for the Big 10 if they successfully blocked the Big 10's advancement into the Mid Atlantic. With Texas under contract to ESPN for the LHN until 2034 then really the Big 10 in order to get to 16 has nowhere else to go if the ACC holds together. Knowing that Delany would want another Eastern school to go with Maryland Missouri was therefore snatched up and stored in the SEC to prevent a scenario in which Oklahoma would go to the Big 10.

There is no doubt but what ESPN wants Texas. Look they doled out a big loser of a contract to hold their options in the Mouse's gloves. Texas will want OU close at hand no matter where they land. Oklahoma has to have the Cowboys with them. Now that Louisville has cracked the ACC's academic standards wide open the door for WVU to finally be considered has to be in the mix for the ACC even if the purists bristle at the thought.

So, ESPN blocks the Big 10 in the East, resolves their research dilemma in the West by getting Kansas and having their Oklahoma impasse resolved by Mizzou. The SEC lands both Oklahoma's but with Texas refusing to park themselves in the ACC the way is finally paved for them in the SEC.

The Big 10 takes Missouri and Kansas and moves to 16.

The ACC takes West Virginia, and Notre Dame full time to move to 16.

The SEC stands at 16 with OU, OSU, and Texas.

The PAC either stands pat or adds 32 million to its footprint with Iowa State, Kansas State, Texas Tech and T.C.U.

But with a little creativity things could work out much more smoothly:

The Big 10 takes 4: Missouri, Kansas, Iowa State, Virginia Tech
The SEC takes 5: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Baylor, Kansas State
The ACC takes: Cincinnati, Connecticut, West Virginia, Notre Dame and Temple

That's 8. Big 12 is dissolved. If the PAC wants into to Texas their option is the following: Texas Tech, Houston, T.C.U., and hopefully B.Y.U..

That's 70 P4 schools including those with the biggest cases to be made for inclusion. Even if the PAC doesn't play ball the three 18 member conferences in the East and Midwest have some really nice divisions:

Big 10 West:
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska
Big 10 Central
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Big 10 East:
Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Virginia Tech

What does this do for the Big 10? Well first off it gives them a more compact grouping of schools for each division. It helps Nebraska reemerge as a contender for the conference crown in the West, gives Missouri an annual shot, and allows for Iowa and Minnesota's recent strengthening to continue.

In the Central you have three strong schools Michigan, Michigan State, and Wisconsin.

In the East you have the same with Ohio State, Penn State and Virginia Tech

Basketball consist of 22 conference games: 10 in your division (home & home) and 1 game each against the other 12.



The ACC is much more regionally aligned now:
ACC North:
Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Temple
ACC Central:
Duke, Louisville, North Carolina, Pittsburgh, Virginia, West Virginia,
ACC South:
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Miami, N.C. State, Wake Forest

What does this do for the ACC?

It gives Notre Dame a game in Ohio every other year which helps them recruit that state more heavily. It allows Syracuse to reemerge as a contender and gives the ACC a divisional representative in the Conference Semis that draws in the Northeast viewers every year.

In the Central it reunites Pitt and WVU and keeps UNC with traditional rivals Virginia and Duke. With the reemergence of UNC in football, and with Pitt's recent improvement, and the presence of WVU this region finally has some football gravitas.

In the South you group the teams that really want to play one another and you give them Wake to help them out.

For Basketball see the Big 10 schedule. With a wild card for the football semis it is conceivable that the wild card would come from the South most years which is also good for ratings in that a South school would be pitted most likely against both a North and Central school each year in the semis permitting two strong candidates to still emerge from the South if not challenged from the other two divisions.

With the SEC you include Texas in a division that has everyone they want to keep without having A&M forced to be in that division.

SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Out West, as I said, Texas keeps essentially it's chief rivals and adds Arkansas back to that time honored rivals list. Baylor finds a home as part of the payoff.

In the Central (the Old SEC West) Vanderbilt replaces Auburn lessening the harsh strength of the division while building up the East a little bit.

In the East Auburn finally gets its rivals back and helps to strengthen that division.

Basketball schedule is the same as that of the Big 10 and ACC.

Football schedules are as follows for all conferences:

5 divisional games, 2 permanent rival (1 from each of the other two divisions), and two rotating from each of the other two divisions.

That's right there are 11 conference games, one OOC game against another P4 school for a total of 12 P4 games.

Now Spring games are replaced by a preseason game either 1 or 2 weeks before the open of the season against a FCS, or G5 school. That gives every P4 school 7 home games to sell.

The PAC can stay at 12 or go to 16 with Texas Tech, T.C.U., Houston and B.Y.U. (who caves into demands to get in).

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

(12-11-2015 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

Another issue with 3 divisions in an 18 team conference is Alabama would lose the Iron Bowl and Third Weekend in October games. I think at a certain point, these schools would need deregulation to pass to allow grater flexibility in scheduling and determining their champions.

I just don't see the SEC or the Big Ten losing any schools that they currently have. I doubt the PAC 12 loses any either, but I don't see that any other league would be interested in those schools anyway due to the extreme geography.

Allow me to posit this:

Movement doesn't start in earnest until the GORs expire in about 10 years.

The SEC, having already expanded into the Midwest, decides to become a broader national force. The TV money, the recruiting, and the overall exposure are too tempting to pass up. In order to accomplish this, you need national brands of which several are now available after the end of the GORs.

Texas, Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, Iowa State, and BYU are recruited to form a new Western division.

In the East, the ACC is finally dealt its death blow. UNC, Duke, Virginia, Florida State, Clemson, Georgia Tech are brought into the fold.

Notre Dame is offered a spot as well. Highly possible they decline, but for the purpose of this exercise let's say they accept in order to avoid losing exposure in growth markets.. In the wake of that, the SEC moves North again with Syracuse, UConn, Boston College, and Pittsburgh.

That's 32 strong brands from various regions of the country. The SEC is in a unique position to bring them together if they were to choose to do so.

West: BYU, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Baylor
Central: Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Alabama, Auburn, Vanderbilt
East: Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, Tennessee, Kentucky
North: Syracuse, UConn, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Notre Dame

7 division games, 2 permanent rivals from any of the other divisions, 2 more games on rotation with the rest of the league with conference semi-finals to follow. I know that's a massive league, but it removes the need to play OOC games as virtually anyone you would be interested in playing is in the league. Every game's value is increased by the fact that it's an intra-conference game rather than simply an inter-regional game.

The B1G takes Virginia Tech and NC State to fill out their roster. It's possible then that they move to combine with the PAC 12 to counteract the SEC's power grab.

When the GORs expire, because expansion has been a flop and realignment just has not worked to the benefit of anyone, we will return to smaller conferences.
I think we will see 6 more regional leagues and the biggest problems we will face is how to explain why Texas A & M is leaving the SEC and the justification of Penn State to leave the B1G for the new Northeast conference.
This just can't go on! Nobody in Texas gets the Iron Bowl, or the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party.......they just don't care.
The folks in Nebraska want to watch Michigan v. Ohio State.....give me a break!

11 will be the magic number (except on the west coast). 5 x 11 + 1 x 12.
10 conference games will help eliminate the SOS controversy and the playoff moves to 8 teams. 6 conference champs and 2 at large.
FOX and ESPN are happy in that they won't have to broadcast all of those games that had audiences of less than a million viewers and they will save a bundle on reduced production costs.

Northeast Conference
BC, UConn, Syracuse, Penn State, Pitt, Temple, Rutgers, Maryland, West Virginia, Cincinnati and Louisville.

SEC
Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi, Miss. State, LSU, Georgia and Arkansas.

PAC
Colorado, Arizona State, Arizona, Utah, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal., Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, and Washington State.

B1G
Ohio State, Mich., Mich. State, Purdue, Indiana, Ill., Northwestern, Minn., Wisc., Iowa and Missouri.

Great Plains/Southwest
Texas, A&M, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and Nebraska.

ACC
Miami, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State, Carolina, Dook, UVa, and Va. Tech.

Bigger has not worked, and even bigger is doomed to failure. There is no continuity, no unity, no reason for cohesion other than money. It may work on the professional level but it will not work for colleges and Universities and their fans.

BTW, I didn't forget Notre Dame.....they are still independent.

(12-12-2015 12:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  When the GORs expire, because expansion has been a flop and realignment just has not worked to the benefit of anyone, we will return to smaller conferences.
I think we will see 6 more regional leagues and the biggest problems we will face is how to explain why Texas A & M is leaving the SEC and the justification of Penn State to leave the B1G for the new Northeast conference.
This just can't go on! Nobody in Texas gets the Iron Bowl, or the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party.......they just don't care.
The folks in Nebraska want to watch Michigan v. Ohio State.....give me a break!

11 will be the magic number (except on the west coast). 5 x 11 + 1 x 12.
10 conference games will help eliminate the SOS controversy and the playoff moves to 8 teams. 6 conference champs and 2 at large.
FOX and ESPN are happy in that they won't have to broadcast all of those games that had audiences of less than a million viewers and they will save a bundle on reduced production costs.

Northeast Conference
BC, UConn, Syracuse, Penn State, Pitt, Temple, Rutgers, Maryland, West Virginia, Cincinnati and Louisville.

SEC
Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Mississippi, Miss. State, LSU, Georgia and Arkansas.

PAC
Colorado, Arizona State, Arizona, Utah, USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal., Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, and Washington State.

B1G
Ohio State, Mich., Mich. State, Purdue, Indiana, Ill., Northwestern, Minn., Wisc., Iowa and Missouri.

Great Plains/Southwest
Texas, A&M, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, Iowa State and Nebraska.

ACC
Miami, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Clemson, South Carolina, Wake Forest, NC State, Carolina, Dook, UVa, and Va. Tech.

Bigger has not worked, and even bigger is doomed to failure. There is no continuity, no unity, no reason for cohesion other than money. It may work on the professional level but it will not work for colleges and Universities and their fans.

BTW, I didn't forget Notre Dame.....they are still independent.

If deregulation passes, I think we'll see some experimentation with how conferences structure themselves and how they crown their champions. I still believe that you are a member of a conference because that is the group you want to be associated with and play against. I still think a division-less structure could work in conference play.

(12-12-2015 12:36 PM)XLance Wrote:  When the GORs expire, because expansion has been a flop and realignment just has not worked to the benefit of anyone, we will return to smaller conferences.
I think we will see 6 more regional leagues and the biggest problems we will face is how to explain why Texas A & M is leaving the SEC and the justification of Penn State to leave the B1G for the new Northeast conference.
This just can't go on! Nobody in Texas gets the Iron Bowl, or the World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party.......they just don't care.
The folks in Nebraska want to watch Michigan v. Ohio State.....give me a break!

They don't have to be interested. Consolidating leagues and footprints reduces costs and keeps revenue in-house. The teams from different regions don't even have to play each other very often to be a member of one league and reap benefits from it. That's why I suggested the 32 team model made up of different portions of the country.

My proposal is probably totally unrealistic, but it would probably work for several reasons.

(12-11-2015 05:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-11-2015 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

Another issue with 3 divisions in an 18 team conference is Alabama would lose the Iron Bowl and Third Weekend in October games. I think at a certain point, these schools would need deregulation to pass to allow grater flexibility in scheduling and determining their champions.

No they wouldn't. The Iron bowl would remain as is as a permanent rivalry game.

(12-11-2015 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

This is the kind of thing that would happen only if we broker out the final moves in order to move forward with 4 conferences. If we broker out the Big 12 then the non brand schools will find a home. If we wait until the end of the GOR's here is what I think really happens. And note if we move to a P3 I fully expect deregulation, at least 3 divisions if not 4, internal semifinals, and a tier breaker to determine wild card participants in the CFP.

If we wait until the end of the GOR's to finish expansion then here is what happens:

1. Only brands that add value get added.
2. The final upper tier will be smaller than 64 schools.
3. The movement will include ACC schools if they have not gotten a network, or some similar delivery system that generates additional revenue.

Schools taken: Notre Dame, North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, Florida State, Clemson. Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas.

Schools possibly taken: Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Iowa State, N.C. State, Kansas State

Schools likely left out: T.C.U., Baylor, Wake Forest, Boston College, Pittsburgh, Miami, Louisville, West Virginia

I could see Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State possibly moving in a group to the PAC possibly to take them to 18.

I could see Notre Dame, North Carolina, Duke and Virginia headed to the Big 10.

or even to the SEC depending upon how much ESPN valued them in one place or the other.

I could see Florida State, Clemson, N.C. State and Virginia Tech to the SEC if the aforementioned went as a block to the Big 10.

But any way you cut it if we wait intil the end of the GOR I think we wind up with fewer than we presently have whether that number is 54, or 60.

(12-13-2015 10:05 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-11-2015 05:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-11-2015 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

Another issue with 3 divisions in an 18 team conference is Alabama would lose the Iron Bowl and Third Weekend in October games. I think at a certain point, these schools would need deregulation to pass to allow grater flexibility in scheduling and determining their champions.

No they wouldn't. The Iron bowl would remain as is as a permanent rivalry game.

Right you are JR!
For the game and conferences to survive, long term rivalries must be preserved (see what happened to the Big 12 when the Oklahoma v. Nebraska ceased to be an every year game).

(12-13-2015 02:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(12-13-2015 10:05 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-11-2015 05:39 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-11-2015 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 07:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  SEC West:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas

SEC Central:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt

SEC East:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee

Get to play purple Kansas again in a bowl game this season; still don't care at all to ever play them. Would rather have Taco Tech or Kansas and Missouri.

Another issue with 3 divisions in an 18 team conference is Alabama would lose the Iron Bowl and Third Weekend in October games. I think at a certain point, these schools would need deregulation to pass to allow grater flexibility in scheduling and determining their champions.

No they wouldn't. The Iron bowl would remain as is as a permanent rivalry game.

Right you are JR!
For the game and conferences to survive, long term rivalries must be preserved (see what happened to the Big 12 when the Oklahoma v. Nebraska ceased to be an every year game).

I never under stood that one. That game was the classic from the old Big 8.