(05-19-2018 09:36 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 09:14 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 07:46 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 07:22 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  

(05-19-2018 01:55 PM)OdinFrigg Wrote:  That remains the big question. Hopefully, before offers are extended, Texas is clear on their intentions. But we know they can flip or play manipulative games.

Going to 18 to include UT? That may be too much at one time, particularly 4 to the west (B12). But given near future variables, inclusive of broadcasting contracts, it would be hard to rule it out with certainty.

18 seems unruly in reality (fun in fantasy realignment.) However, should be optin be available, I can’t imaine either party (Texas or SEC) forgoing it without simply being stubborn. I’d do:

16 - Oklahoma, Oklahoma St
18 - Texas, Texas Tech
20 - Kansas, West Virginia
24 - Florida St, Clemson, North Carolina St, Virginia Tech

West: Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St, Kansas, Missouri
South: Texas A&M, Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi, Mississippi St, Alabama
North: Tennessee, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St
East: Auburn, Florida, Florida St, Georgia, South Carolina, Clemson

If the SEC landed Oklahoma and Texas, even with Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, there would be no further additions, ever. With UT & OU in the fold nobody left in the CFP outside of Ohio State and Notre Dame could add to our revenue. That twosome, or foursome is game over for the SEC.

High member numbers, say anything above 16, the entity ceases being a fundamental conference and more of an association. There are only 12 regular season fb games a season, and 20-something basketball games, several of which are home-to-home meetings. Plus all the other sports need to be accommodated and adjust. It would be a nightmare for the baseball tournament, unless cutting the invites. That will not go over well. And teams not getting basketball tournament invites will be a huge fuss. Those tournament available dates are crunched as it is.
Even for fb, making the full round or rotation gets extended. Bonding works better with frequency.
I am not one of those that says take Texas at all cost. And in terms of stability, it could lessen and the breakaway movement happens. The more-haves leave the haves. They will not all be equal, and they certainly aren't now.

In a content driven world having more haves will just be the norm for the best paid conferences.

The way you handle the baseball and basketball tournaments is to have the first rounds in division at a divisional location. with the division winner getting a bye to the finals. The other 8 play it out and the winner in each division advance to the final 4 of the Conference.

If there is one thing you learn setting up tournaments it's that a little imagination solves a myriad of problems.

As for scheduling at 18 you can still play everyone every three years by moving to 9 conference games. You simply rotate 6 groups of three to create 2 divisions of 9 every year. If you have to keep a permanent rival then you play 10 conference games, or just don't count the rival as a conference game.

I think the valid objection to Texas is the potential of future divisiveness.

For fb, extending the season with earlier (August) start, before most colleges are in session; and/or go deeper into January, in order to accommodate, potentially, an enhanced number of playoffs for within conference and post-season, would be new problems depending on the number of divisions within a conference. If post-season goes to 8 team playoffs, that's another week at least. The FCS doesn't have near the intense logistical issues since they use campus sites in the process. Then there's the matter of conflicting with NFL scheduling.
If near all power schools are in one conference, what's the point of having competition (on field or the court)? The conference championship essentially becomes the nat'l champ. Maybe the other conferences' provided competition essentially resides with schools such as Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, FSU, Clemson, USC, and Washington, and just those, are in three different conferences.
I never thought 4 power conferences @ 16 each is a realistic design. It is simply too exclusionary; and unlike the NFL, campuses grow, others get smaller, funding and enrollment diminishes some places, while others grow fast, and much happens outside the P5. There's no bumping system. The NFL has centralized governance, dealing with much fewer numbers, and is about one sport, nothing else.
That said, I too like symmetry, defined levels of competition, and each conference playing with the same numbers (relatively).
Gezz, JRsec, you roped me into these conversations. lol.