JRsec
Super Moderator
Posts: 38,335
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 8031
I Root For: SEC
Location:
|
RE: If the SEC did expand again and did so from the Big 12 who should we take and why?
(11-04-2014 02:14 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: (11-03-2014 02:53 AM)JRsec Wrote: (11-03-2014 02:23 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: (11-03-2014 02:07 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: (11-03-2014 12:48 AM)JRsec Wrote: Perhaps ESPN and FOX should work together to divide out the Big 12.
ESPN gets out of the LHN and FOX gives up on Oklahoma and that's the compromise for the Networks. The Big 10 and SEC get three new states each. The Big 10 gets 3 AAU programs and a decent football program in the Cowboys. The SEC gains a second Texas school, a national brand, and three new states.
Let the Big 10 take care of Iowa State. And for that they also get Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma State.
The SEC takes care of Baylor since they are unacceptable to the PAC and Oklahoma, Kansas State, and West Virginia.
The PAC gets into Texas if it wants to with Texas Tech and T.C.U.
All 10 schools are taken care of and annual games against their in state rivals are set up between the Big 10 and SEC, or with the PAC.
Kansas / Kansas State, Oklahoma / Texas, Oklahoma / Oklahoma State, Texas / Texas A&M, Texas A&M / Baylor, Baylor / T.C.U., and Missouri / Kansas, and Missouri / Illinois all become Big 10 versus SEC contests with a couple of PAC games thrown in.
It improves the Big 10 market wise and with a football brand and hoops.
It improves the SEC market wise and with decent programs in both football and hoops.
It puts the PACN into DFW and West Texas.
It leaves the ACC in a position to expand with Cincinnati or Connecticut but doesn't depend upon them to have to do anything.
The Big 10's West Division becomes:
Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oklahoma State, Texas
Central:
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
The SEC West Division becomes:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
The SEC Central becomes:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
The SEC East becomes:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia
If the PAC doesn't want Texas Tech and T.C.U. and Texas insists that Tech have a home then they could simply take Baylor's place in the SEC (although I would rather have Baylor). Either way by placing all 10, or at least 8 of them the deal gets done.
If Kansas and Kansas State can't be separated or Oklahoma and Oklahoma State it is not as profitable but the two Kansas schools could move the Big 10 and the two Oklahoma Schools to the SEC and you could still work the same kind of arrangement. Maybe Boone Pickens can give the CIC some money to make the deal sweeter?
This is fairly plausible; however, OSU would be a no go to the B1G due to academics. I think Rice could work as a school to give Texas another regional partner and is AAU. Rice with B1G/P5 money could easily compete as well as Northwestern being in Houston, TX FB recruiting hotbed. It is also an academic powerhouse that would make the B1G presidents happy. It would really divide Texas among 3 conferences (PAC/SEC/B1G) so no one conference would dominate.
OSU could go to the PAC and the PAC could pick up one of Houston, BYU, UNM, UNLV/Nevada, or Hawaii. They could also add 3 non-B12 schools and go to 18 for a 4x18. I'll assume 16 since most of those are not ready and they go with New Mexico or Houston (to combat UT/A&M with 3 schools in TX).
KU and KSU could separate easily if they would both have a power conference home. Not ideal, but KSU is not relegated to the G5 and they could continue the rivalry OOC. Same for OU/OSU.
Using your original conferences I would make the following changes:
It leaves the ACC in a position to expand with Cincinnati or Connecticut but doesn't depend upon them to have to do anything.
Same and leaves them time to work on ND since with 4 conferences they probably go champs only and ND is forced to join a conference and likely it is the ACC where it and FSU would be the most likely CCG each season. They could add 4 more and go to 18 with UCF to really plant the FL flag and keep the VA/NC schools in the same division. Sixteen is more likely though, with ND and Cincinnati likely the picks.
ACC North: ND, BC, Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, Cincinnati
ACC East: UNC, UVA, VT, WF, NC ST, Duke
ACC South: FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Louisville, UCF
The Big 10's West Division becomes:
Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rice, Texas
Central:
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
East:
Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
The SEC West Division becomes:
Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
The SEC Central becomes:
Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
The SEC East becomes:
Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia
PAC north becomes
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, WSU
PAC East becomes
TTU, TCU, Oklahoma State, New Mexico/Houston
PAC Mountain becomes
Arizona, ASU, CU, Utah
PAC California becomes
USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford
The PAC is definitely the least happy with these divisions (No Texas or OU, or even Kansas), but they also have the worst options on the table unless Texas and OU want to go west. However, they do get 3 schools in Texas (if they add UH) and get schools throughout the state, even if they are lesser brands, and gain 4 CST schools for earlier games and east coast exposure. Texas recruiting exposure as well.
Pretty sure UT only goes to the B1G with OU, but you never know. If OU insists on the SEC and Texas is dead set against the SEC, then the B1G makes a lot of sense at that point, if they decide east is where they want to be instead of the west (PAC) and the B1G would take Rice (or another Texas school). Of course, ND and Texas for 15 and 16 in the ACC would make some sense too though UT would have no travel/regional partner(s) like WVU's situation in the current B12. Academically they self identify 11 schools as peers and 7 are B1G, 3 PAC and 1 ACC. So academically the B1G is their best fit.
I can buy the ACC but just not with UCF. I think Tulane completes their Southern most division perfectly without having to take a 3rd Florida School. New Orleans is a destination game, puts them into the Southern Louisiana market, gives them a presence at the Sugar Bowl, and helps out F.S.U. as that is an easy travel up I10. And Tulane fits much of the ACC profile, they are private and AAU. Just a thought.
So to use your revision of the scenario I threw out there here is where we would stand:
Big 10:
East: Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers
Central: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, Wisconsin
West: Iowa State, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Rice, Texas
SEC:
East: Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, South Carolina, West Virginia
Central: Alabama, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
West: Arkansas, Baylor, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
ACC:
North: Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse
Central: Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest
South: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Tulane
PAC:
North: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
West: California, Cal Los Angeles, Southern California, Stanford
South: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah
East: Houston, New Mexico, T.C.U., Texas Tech
If you wanted an 18 member Pack just add B.Y.U. (in spite of their issues) and either Nevada or U.N.L.V. and you have 4 eighteen member conferences.
Now here is the resulting improvement for each conference:
The Big 10 has added only AAU schools while picking up a basketball brand and football brand and improving baseball significantly. By scheduling early season games as home games in Texas and early summer games North of that the Big 10 becomes viable in baseball. They also pick up 30 million viewers and gain access to Southern recruiting markets.
The SEC has added 4 schools with decent basketball programs, a national brand in football, 4 decent football schools, solidified its Texas markets, and added nearly 9 million viewers without suffering any serious brand erosion and while adding to its football gravitas. 3 of the 4 have good baseball programs and all still maintain a fairly dominate footprint.
The ACC has added 3 schools that fit with both football and basketball profiles, entered the Ohio market, locked down the New England market picking up a national hoops power, and landed N.D. Tulane adds nice perks to their Southern division football travels and fits academically and historically.
The PAC picks up Texas, Albuquerque, or if expanding further Nevada markets for the PACN.
None of the conferences lose identity.
Athletically here is what is set up for their conference championship series:
The Big 10 sets up likely annual entries of Texas and Nebraska from the West, Michigan State, Michigan, or Wisconsin from the Central, and Ohio State, Penn State from the East. That plus the best at large means they have spread their top brands out which enhances viewership of their championship series.
The SEC simply spreads its power out. In the West we could have any of them emerge as it would be a very balanced division. In the central Alabama and L.S.U. (and when they recover Tennessee) are set up to emerge, and from the East it too is so balanced that practically anyone could emerge.
The ACC stands to gain the most because Notre Dame and Cincinnati could easily emerge from the North and Pitt and Syracuse could reemerge from that grouping as well.
The Central is set up for Virginia Tech, North Carolina or a Cutcliffe coached Duke.
The South gets to pad stats against Tulane while still beating up on each other, but the champion would be in great position every year and this division would likely supply the at large spot which would help with ACC viewer interest in its football championship series as well.
The PAC is set up for Washington / Oregon in the North, U.S.C./ Stanford in the West, an Arizona school or Utah in the South, and a Texas entrant in the East. This means that into their championship series they have their names and Texas viewing interest.
I think something like this scenario has a lot of merit.
Tulane was a school I considered for the ACC's 18th spot along with Memphis. Memphis would have a perfect location to fit in the ACC footprint; however, academically they would be a hard sell, so I doubt they would get the call. Tulane is pretty far away and like Rice it would have to invest to improve its AD, but it is a great school in a great location and recruiting area (per capita LA is the best state for FBS talent). Tulane makes a lot of sense there as it is closer to the ACC mold then UCF or Memphis. SMU is another school who could work with easy flights into DFW and gets every conference a least one flag planted in TX. Academically it is good enough and as we have seen in the past the boosters would pour cash into it's sports programs.
You overlooked Oklahoma State, probably because I moved them out of the B1G. Oklahoma St. probably lands in PAC 16 and then, if the PAC went to 18, I think New Mexico is a sure thing and probably a Nevada school. BYU is the most deserving, but the religious issues and already having Utah work against them so I lean toward UNLV or Nevada; however, there is a chance that they would get that last bid or Hawaii could work in there as well.
I like the 72 school model. It is more inclusive and the schools added for the most part bring value to the conferences without subtracting much if any revenue. It gets most of the schools that are as good as the bottom P5 schools into a major conference. There would still be a a handful of schools with an argument (like BYU, ECU, etc.), but fewer than we have now. A 4x20 model would basically cover all the most deserving schools, but it also starts to, maybe, take a little revenue off the table IMO. However, reshuffling the 65 into 4 conferences would be more profitable for existing P5 schools so that is what they will do most likely unless politics gets involved heavily.
Oklahoma State? Oops! I corrected it and moved all 4 major conferences to a 3 x 18. I do think Tulane (who is presently upgrading facilities) would make the better addition to the ACC.
Interestingly I've worked on a P4 model that is not equally distributed but has the Big 10, PAC, SEC, and a new P4 private school league where economic independence can be maintained but the privates enter into a scheduling agreement. It vacates Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, Miami, Duke, and others from their present conferences. I don't think it is economically viable but should the union thing actually pose a problem it might need to be considered. It leaves three dynamic state school only conferences however and yet works in the best academic privates.
|
|