(03-05-2014 01:14 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:38 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:03 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 03:58 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 04:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Now, what do I think will really happen? When either the GOR's have expired, been adjudicated less effective than previously believed, or the networks intervene for the shaping of product, or a breakaway occurs then eventually anytime between the next two years and the next 12 this might happen.

Texas and Oklahoma eventually join the SEC. It's what we've been after since 1992. By adding Texas A&M, Arkansas, and Missouri we've set up a division for them that would also include L.S.U. and the Mississippi schools separating them from the traditional SEC powers other than L.S.U. and giving them in the Western Division the conference they always wanted anyway. Plus by their simple addition the SEC would become solidified as the top earning conference.

The Big 10 adds Kansas, and eventually North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia to get to 18. And when they do the SEC finally picks up N.C. State and Virginia Tech. Why does U.N.C. eventually go Big 10? Money, academics, and because Virginia and Duke will lean that way. By that time North Carolina's latest scandal over academic fraud for athletic eligibility will have their leaders refocused on making a purely academic decision.

The Big 12 and ACC remnants form a new conference that looks like this:

Boston College, Connecticut, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, West Virginia (Former Big East Division)
Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Wake Forest (Former ACC Division)
Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, T.C.U. (Former Big 12 Division)
*Notre Dame remains an independent attached to this conference.

The PAC 12 stays at 12 and eventually grows to 14 with a Nevada school and a compliant B.Y.U.. They work to develop Hawaii and New Mexico. So initially the P5 is comprised of 66 schools then grows to 68 and eventually to 70, plus Notre Dame.

The New SEC:
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas A&M
Alabama, Auburn, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech

The New Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue
Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

If the ACC does ever come apart, you are right in that Carolina and Virginia would never join the SEC, no offense to our former Southern Conference mates. The only think that would thow a chink into the otherwise very well laid out plan..... is Georgia Tech. If Carolina, UVa and Dook move to the B1G, I would look for Tech to try to tag along too (just a FYI).
But I don't think that ESPN has any desire to give up the bulk of viewers in the mid-atlantic. Besides your line-up only weakens the SEC in that it will create another really good football conference with viewership in three distinct parts of the country and hems in the growth potential of the SEC network. It also gives the B1G access to the South. The question then becomes: do the massive gains in the Texas market(with Texas and Oklahoma) outweigh the potential gains of the B1G in the South (especially if the B1G gets access to Georgia (Georgia Tech) or one of the two ACC Florida Schools.
Sometimes it's better to stick with the devil you know than the devil you don't.

Supposedly OSU and Delaney really wanted to add FSU this go around according to some OSU insiders, but Michigan and Wisconsin opposed (AAU snobs). The B1G really likes GT, but doesn't want them on an island. I think if UNC and UVA go to the B1G and require Duke be taken as well, then I believe GT is a shoo in. I think then FSU gets in so that they can add a football juggernaut and get a small foothold into GA/FL recruiting. I could see this: Duke, UNC, UVA, GT, FSU, and one more (Kansas, Clemson, VT, Miami, Syracuse). If I was the B1G, if this came to pass, I would take Clemson (or Miami) as the last school to help sink their talons deeper into the SE. That would make them much stronger on the FB field and they would dominate basketball.

The SEC would add NC State and VT (if available). Whatever southern ACC schools remained (Miami, Clemson, Louisville?) would be begging the SEC to take them too. The SEC would get on the phone with Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Since the B1G took the SE ACC teams the B12 is doomed to always be a very distant 4th since the big hope of the B12 is the ACC comes apart and they get FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT and a couple more and vault themselves back into B1G/SEC territory. If the B1G took FSU and GT then I think Texas, Kansas, and OU would be looking to the PAC, B1G (24 schools was mentioned as a possible end game a few times by B1G people) or SEC to pick up them and a few friends. The financial disparity would be too large to continue as a 10 school conference or as a larger conferences with the least valuable remaining ACC schools.

I kind of want this to happen to see where KU, Texas and OU would end up and see how the SEC and PAC react. Would the SEC go for some northern ACC schools to strike into the NE since the B1G invaded the SE? Would the B12 and PAC merge or the SEC and B12? Would KU, OU, Texas and 1 more go to the B1G 24? Would the PAC add ND and a eastern group of schools? There would be so many crazy options and scenarios.

The Big 10 will never land Florida State or Clemson and I have some doubts about Georgia Tech though not as many as the other two. Miami could go anywhere since they have to fly everywhere to play anyway. Florida State and Clemson alumni might be quite happy to be in the ACC, but both alumni bases have all of their interest in playing Southern rivals and traveling to away games. If the SEC really thought that they might go to the Big 10 both would get immediate offers and the difference in SEC money and Big 10 money wouldn't be enough to cover the travel. And so far there is only 1 non AAU Big 10 school and my money is that it will stay that way unless Notre Dame comes in, or Syracuse wants to reapply to AAU. I don't think the Big 10 will come any farther South than North Carolina. Georgia Tech is the only remaining Southern Public that might consider the Big 10.

Remember Florida State and Clemson are football first schools and both know that if they chose the Big 10 they would never recruit the South as well again. Their football days would be over. Besides the Big 10 like the SEC will likely not desire to dilute such a strong regional brand by going counter to their cultural roots. The real threat to the Big 10 if they did try to encroach the deep South is that the SEC wouldn't fool around with Pitt and Syracuse, they would go after Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan to form a major pay day conference. Add those three to Texas, Oklahoma and Florida State and a new tier beyond the P5 would emerge. The SEC has 5 of the top 10 earners now and 9 of the top 20. Add the schools listed and we own the top 10 outright and have 5 of the next 10. It would be NFL lite. And for those who think the Big 10 can't be poached there have been many editorials written at Ohio State already that address their weariness with carrying 8 of the 12 current Big 10 programs, soon to be 10 of the 14. Add those three to the SEC and the monetary value explodes and then those three would be in a conference where the vast majority all pull their weight and add value in content to one another. I love it when people say that Oklahoma and Texas want to be with peers. The vast majority of the economic peers of Oklahoma and Texas are in the SEC already. Ditto for Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan. If you added Notre Dame and Clemson to that line up you would 17 of the top 20 earners. At that point being a charter member of the SEC might not be enough of a reason to get an automatic in to remaining in the conference.

Just something to think about when we talk about grandiose Big 10 plans. As they say in True Grit "that's bold talk for a one eyed fat man!" Besides the Big 10 and SEC won't be able to take ACC teams without each other's cooperation.

Also, if we ever do move to a P3 the Irish will have to drop anchor. If they move with Duke, U.N.C. & UVa I still believe Delany rounds out New England with B.C. and New York with Syracuse. There won't be room for G.T..

Speaking of 'bold talk' JR, the concept of Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State leaving the B1G to join the SEC is about as realistic as Alabama, Georgia and Florida leaving the SEC to join the B1G. Maybe it happens when the federal government takes over college sports, shortly after nationalizing health care, the auto industry and the banks.

Neither BC nor Clemson would ever get an offer from the B1G. Neither are AAU, of course, but they also don't fit the profile of a land grant type state sponsored research university with large alumni bases.

I think your original B1G lineup gets it almost right. Although Delany's sights are set eastward, I think they'll add one western team to help bolster Nebraska as a member, most likely Kansas. UVA, and UNC are the likely first east coast additions, but Georgia Tech would get the invitation, not Duke. Duke's a great academic institution but GT is one of the top 5 engineering schools in the US and adds a presence in the Atlanta market and a foothold in Georgia recruiting. The SEC at that point gets is wished for outposts in VT and NC St.

If we then go to a P3 structure following an ACC jailbreak, only Texas, Oklahoma, FSU and Notre Dame are assured of spots in either the SEC, B1G or PAC. Other schools will certainly get invites, but only because they might be part of a package to lure one of the big 4 or as fill ins to round out the number of conference members.

Texas' decision will likely drive the outcome. If we assume Texas and Oklahoma are in the SEC, as you project, and we are left with only the teams you list as ACC/Big 12 remnants, I think quite a few of them have trouble finding a conference.

The B1G would only take FSU, ND, Syracuse and GT (or Duke, if GT is already in the B1G instead of Duke), or more likely only two of them to get to 20 members. Some of the Big 12 remnants, like Texas Tech, ISU, KSU or OSU might be attractive to the PAC to fill in its eastern division. The SEC might want some combination of Clemson, FSU, OSU, Texas Tech, Kansas St., Pitt, or Syracuse, but even many of them might be a stretch. If the SEC already has Texas and Oklahoma, they don't need Tech or OSU, and the SEC might be better served by doubling up in Florida with FSU and adding another program, like Pitt, that gets them into a new state.

That still leaves lots of quality programs in the Eastern US out in the cold or in a remnants type conference. It's hard for me to see how we get much beyond 60-64 teams in a P3 world.

Personally, I would rather see ND stay affiliated with the "remnants" conference (or join it in full) than ever see it join the Big Ten Conference.

Heck, I would rather ND deemphasize football and just go ahead and join the Big East than ever join the Big Ten.

(03-05-2014 07:58 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 01:14 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:38 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:03 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-03-2014 03:58 PM)XLance Wrote:  If the ACC does ever come apart, you are right in that Carolina and Virginia would never join the SEC, no offense to our former Southern Conference mates. The only think that would thow a chink into the otherwise very well laid out plan..... is Georgia Tech. If Carolina, UVa and Dook move to the B1G, I would look for Tech to try to tag along too (just a FYI).
But I don't think that ESPN has any desire to give up the bulk of viewers in the mid-atlantic. Besides your line-up only weakens the SEC in that it will create another really good football conference with viewership in three distinct parts of the country and hems in the growth potential of the SEC network. It also gives the B1G access to the South. The question then becomes: do the massive gains in the Texas market(with Texas and Oklahoma) outweigh the potential gains of the B1G in the South (especially if the B1G gets access to Georgia (Georgia Tech) or one of the two ACC Florida Schools.
Sometimes it's better to stick with the devil you know than the devil you don't.

Supposedly OSU and Delaney really wanted to add FSU this go around according to some OSU insiders, but Michigan and Wisconsin opposed (AAU snobs). The B1G really likes GT, but doesn't want them on an island. I think if UNC and UVA go to the B1G and require Duke be taken as well, then I believe GT is a shoo in. I think then FSU gets in so that they can add a football juggernaut and get a small foothold into GA/FL recruiting. I could see this: Duke, UNC, UVA, GT, FSU, and one more (Kansas, Clemson, VT, Miami, Syracuse). If I was the B1G, if this came to pass, I would take Clemson (or Miami) as the last school to help sink their talons deeper into the SE. That would make them much stronger on the FB field and they would dominate basketball.

The SEC would add NC State and VT (if available). Whatever southern ACC schools remained (Miami, Clemson, Louisville?) would be begging the SEC to take them too. The SEC would get on the phone with Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Since the B1G took the SE ACC teams the B12 is doomed to always be a very distant 4th since the big hope of the B12 is the ACC comes apart and they get FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT and a couple more and vault themselves back into B1G/SEC territory. If the B1G took FSU and GT then I think Texas, Kansas, and OU would be looking to the PAC, B1G (24 schools was mentioned as a possible end game a few times by B1G people) or SEC to pick up them and a few friends. The financial disparity would be too large to continue as a 10 school conference or as a larger conferences with the least valuable remaining ACC schools.

I kind of want this to happen to see where KU, Texas and OU would end up and see how the SEC and PAC react. Would the SEC go for some northern ACC schools to strike into the NE since the B1G invaded the SE? Would the B12 and PAC merge or the SEC and B12? Would KU, OU, Texas and 1 more go to the B1G 24? Would the PAC add ND and a eastern group of schools? There would be so many crazy options and scenarios.

The Big 10 will never land Florida State or Clemson and I have some doubts about Georgia Tech though not as many as the other two. Miami could go anywhere since they have to fly everywhere to play anyway. Florida State and Clemson alumni might be quite happy to be in the ACC, but both alumni bases have all of their interest in playing Southern rivals and traveling to away games. If the SEC really thought that they might go to the Big 10 both would get immediate offers and the difference in SEC money and Big 10 money wouldn't be enough to cover the travel. And so far there is only 1 non AAU Big 10 school and my money is that it will stay that way unless Notre Dame comes in, or Syracuse wants to reapply to AAU. I don't think the Big 10 will come any farther South than North Carolina. Georgia Tech is the only remaining Southern Public that might consider the Big 10.

Remember Florida State and Clemson are football first schools and both know that if they chose the Big 10 they would never recruit the South as well again. Their football days would be over. Besides the Big 10 like the SEC will likely not desire to dilute such a strong regional brand by going counter to their cultural roots. The real threat to the Big 10 if they did try to encroach the deep South is that the SEC wouldn't fool around with Pitt and Syracuse, they would go after Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan to form a major pay day conference. Add those three to Texas, Oklahoma and Florida State and a new tier beyond the P5 would emerge. The SEC has 5 of the top 10 earners now and 9 of the top 20. Add the schools listed and we own the top 10 outright and have 5 of the next 10. It would be NFL lite. And for those who think the Big 10 can't be poached there have been many editorials written at Ohio State already that address their weariness with carrying 8 of the 12 current Big 10 programs, soon to be 10 of the 14. Add those three to the SEC and the monetary value explodes and then those three would be in a conference where the vast majority all pull their weight and add value in content to one another. I love it when people say that Oklahoma and Texas want to be with peers. The vast majority of the economic peers of Oklahoma and Texas are in the SEC already. Ditto for Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan. If you added Notre Dame and Clemson to that line up you would 17 of the top 20 earners. At that point being a charter member of the SEC might not be enough of a reason to get an automatic in to remaining in the conference.

Just something to think about when we talk about grandiose Big 10 plans. As they say in True Grit "that's bold talk for a one eyed fat man!" Besides the Big 10 and SEC won't be able to take ACC teams without each other's cooperation.

Also, if we ever do move to a P3 the Irish will have to drop anchor. If they move with Duke, U.N.C. & UVa I still believe Delany rounds out New England with B.C. and New York with Syracuse. There won't be room for G.T..

Speaking of 'bold talk' JR, the concept of Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State leaving the B1G to join the SEC is about as realistic as Alabama, Georgia and Florida leaving the SEC to join the B1G. Maybe it happens when the federal government takes over college sports, shortly after nationalizing health care, the auto industry and the banks.

Neither BC nor Clemson would ever get an offer from the B1G. Neither are AAU, of course, but they also don't fit the profile of a land grant type state sponsored research university with large alumni bases.

I think your original B1G lineup gets it almost right. Although Delany's sights are set eastward, I think they'll add one western team to help bolster Nebraska as a member, most likely Kansas. UVA, and UNC are the likely first east coast additions, but Georgia Tech would get the invitation, not Duke. Duke's a great academic institution but GT is one of the top 5 engineering schools in the US and adds a presence in the Atlanta market and a foothold in Georgia recruiting. The SEC at that point gets is wished for outposts in VT and NC St.

If we then go to a P3 structure following an ACC jailbreak, only Texas, Oklahoma, FSU and Notre Dame are assured of spots in either the SEC, B1G or PAC. Other schools will certainly get invites, but only because they might be part of a package to lure one of the big 4 or as fill ins to round out the number of conference members.

Texas' decision will likely drive the outcome. If we assume Texas and Oklahoma are in the SEC, as you project, and we are left with only the teams you list as ACC/Big 12 remnants, I think quite a few of them have trouble finding a conference.

The B1G would only take FSU, ND, Syracuse and GT (or Duke, if GT is already in the B1G instead of Duke), or more likely only two of them to get to 20 members. Some of the Big 12 remnants, like Texas Tech, ISU, KSU or OSU might be attractive to the PAC to fill in its eastern division. The SEC might want some combination of Clemson, FSU, OSU, Texas Tech, Kansas St., Pitt, or Syracuse, but even many of them might be a stretch. If the SEC already has Texas and Oklahoma, they don't need Tech or OSU, and the SEC might be better served by doubling up in Florida with FSU and adding another program, like Pitt, that gets them into a new state.

That still leaves lots of quality programs in the Eastern US out in the cold or in a remnants type conference. It's hard for me to see how we get much beyond 60-64 teams in a P3 world.

Personally, I would rather see ND stay affiliated with the "remnants" conference (or join it in full) than ever see it join the Big Ten Conference.

Heck, I would rather ND deemphasize football and just go ahead and join the Big East than ever join the Big Ten.

Is that an echo or a broken record?

(03-05-2014 07:58 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Personally, I would rather see ND stay affiliated with the "remnants" conference (or join it in full) than ever see it join the Big Ten Conference.

Heck, I would rather ND deemphasize football and just go ahead and join the Big East than ever join the Big Ten.

Then if things get dicey, maybe you'll take my proposal to the powers that be for the SEC to add Notre Dame, Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Florida State and Texas.

(03-05-2014 09:46 AM)Zombiewoof Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 07:58 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Personally, I would rather see ND stay affiliated with the "remnants" conference (or join it in full) than ever see it join the Big Ten Conference.

Heck, I would rather ND deemphasize football and just go ahead and join the Big East than ever join the Big Ten.

Then if things get dicey, maybe you'll take my proposal to the powers that be for the SEC to add Notre Dame, Kansas, North Carolina, Duke, Florida State and Texas.

Yeah when you think about it Notre Dame has a lot in common with the SEC.

1. We both hold the Big 10 in contempt.

2. We both have rebelled against the "Powers that Be."

3. The SEC is in the Bible Belt and has a growing Catholic presence.

4. Both of us have green as a favorite color $.

5. Both are football first in sports.

6. Even Southern Baptists would be impressed by Touchdown Jesus.

Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

(03-05-2014 08:28 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 07:58 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 01:14 AM)CintiFan Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:38 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-04-2014 02:03 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  Supposedly OSU and Delaney really wanted to add FSU this go around according to some OSU insiders, but Michigan and Wisconsin opposed (AAU snobs). The B1G really likes GT, but doesn't want them on an island. I think if UNC and UVA go to the B1G and require Duke be taken as well, then I believe GT is a shoo in. I think then FSU gets in so that they can add a football juggernaut and get a small foothold into GA/FL recruiting. I could see this: Duke, UNC, UVA, GT, FSU, and one more (Kansas, Clemson, VT, Miami, Syracuse). If I was the B1G, if this came to pass, I would take Clemson (or Miami) as the last school to help sink their talons deeper into the SE. That would make them much stronger on the FB field and they would dominate basketball.

The SEC would add NC State and VT (if available). Whatever southern ACC schools remained (Miami, Clemson, Louisville?) would be begging the SEC to take them too. The SEC would get on the phone with Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. Since the B1G took the SE ACC teams the B12 is doomed to always be a very distant 4th since the big hope of the B12 is the ACC comes apart and they get FSU, Clemson, Miami, GT and a couple more and vault themselves back into B1G/SEC territory. If the B1G took FSU and GT then I think Texas, Kansas, and OU would be looking to the PAC, B1G (24 schools was mentioned as a possible end game a few times by B1G people) or SEC to pick up them and a few friends. The financial disparity would be too large to continue as a 10 school conference or as a larger conferences with the least valuable remaining ACC schools.

I kind of want this to happen to see where KU, Texas and OU would end up and see how the SEC and PAC react. Would the SEC go for some northern ACC schools to strike into the NE since the B1G invaded the SE? Would the B12 and PAC merge or the SEC and B12? Would KU, OU, Texas and 1 more go to the B1G 24? Would the PAC add ND and a eastern group of schools? There would be so many crazy options and scenarios.

The Big 10 will never land Florida State or Clemson and I have some doubts about Georgia Tech though not as many as the other two. Miami could go anywhere since they have to fly everywhere to play anyway. Florida State and Clemson alumni might be quite happy to be in the ACC, but both alumni bases have all of their interest in playing Southern rivals and traveling to away games. If the SEC really thought that they might go to the Big 10 both would get immediate offers and the difference in SEC money and Big 10 money wouldn't be enough to cover the travel. And so far there is only 1 non AAU Big 10 school and my money is that it will stay that way unless Notre Dame comes in, or Syracuse wants to reapply to AAU. I don't think the Big 10 will come any farther South than North Carolina. Georgia Tech is the only remaining Southern Public that might consider the Big 10.

Remember Florida State and Clemson are football first schools and both know that if they chose the Big 10 they would never recruit the South as well again. Their football days would be over. Besides the Big 10 like the SEC will likely not desire to dilute such a strong regional brand by going counter to their cultural roots. The real threat to the Big 10 if they did try to encroach the deep South is that the SEC wouldn't fool around with Pitt and Syracuse, they would go after Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan to form a major pay day conference. Add those three to Texas, Oklahoma and Florida State and a new tier beyond the P5 would emerge. The SEC has 5 of the top 10 earners now and 9 of the top 20. Add the schools listed and we own the top 10 outright and have 5 of the next 10. It would be NFL lite. And for those who think the Big 10 can't be poached there have been many editorials written at Ohio State already that address their weariness with carrying 8 of the 12 current Big 10 programs, soon to be 10 of the 14. Add those three to the SEC and the monetary value explodes and then those three would be in a conference where the vast majority all pull their weight and add value in content to one another. I love it when people say that Oklahoma and Texas want to be with peers. The vast majority of the economic peers of Oklahoma and Texas are in the SEC already. Ditto for Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan. If you added Notre Dame and Clemson to that line up you would 17 of the top 20 earners. At that point being a charter member of the SEC might not be enough of a reason to get an automatic in to remaining in the conference.

Just something to think about when we talk about grandiose Big 10 plans. As they say in True Grit "that's bold talk for a one eyed fat man!" Besides the Big 10 and SEC won't be able to take ACC teams without each other's cooperation.

Also, if we ever do move to a P3 the Irish will have to drop anchor. If they move with Duke, U.N.C. & UVa I still believe Delany rounds out New England with B.C. and New York with Syracuse. There won't be room for G.T..

Speaking of 'bold talk' JR, the concept of Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State leaving the B1G to join the SEC is about as realistic as Alabama, Georgia and Florida leaving the SEC to join the B1G. Maybe it happens when the federal government takes over college sports, shortly after nationalizing health care, the auto industry and the banks.

Neither BC nor Clemson would ever get an offer from the B1G. Neither are AAU, of course, but they also don't fit the profile of a land grant type state sponsored research university with large alumni bases.

I think your original B1G lineup gets it almost right. Although Delany's sights are set eastward, I think they'll add one western team to help bolster Nebraska as a member, most likely Kansas. UVA, and UNC are the likely first east coast additions, but Georgia Tech would get the invitation, not Duke. Duke's a great academic institution but GT is one of the top 5 engineering schools in the US and adds a presence in the Atlanta market and a foothold in Georgia recruiting. The SEC at that point gets is wished for outposts in VT and NC St.

If we then go to a P3 structure following an ACC jailbreak, only Texas, Oklahoma, FSU and Notre Dame are assured of spots in either the SEC, B1G or PAC. Other schools will certainly get invites, but only because they might be part of a package to lure one of the big 4 or as fill ins to round out the number of conference members.

Texas' decision will likely drive the outcome. If we assume Texas and Oklahoma are in the SEC, as you project, and we are left with only the teams you list as ACC/Big 12 remnants, I think quite a few of them have trouble finding a conference.

The B1G would only take FSU, ND, Syracuse and GT (or Duke, if GT is already in the B1G instead of Duke), or more likely only two of them to get to 20 members. Some of the Big 12 remnants, like Texas Tech, ISU, KSU or OSU might be attractive to the PAC to fill in its eastern division. The SEC might want some combination of Clemson, FSU, OSU, Texas Tech, Kansas St., Pitt, or Syracuse, but even many of them might be a stretch. If the SEC already has Texas and Oklahoma, they don't need Tech or OSU, and the SEC might be better served by doubling up in Florida with FSU and adding another program, like Pitt, that gets them into a new state.

That still leaves lots of quality programs in the Eastern US out in the cold or in a remnants type conference. It's hard for me to see how we get much beyond 60-64 teams in a P3 world.

Personally, I would rather see ND stay affiliated with the "remnants" conference (or join it in full) than ever see it join the Big Ten Conference.

Heck, I would rather ND deemphasize football and just go ahead and join the Big East than ever join the Big Ten.

Is that an echo or a broken record?

Lol, that is a one trick pony.

Kids, Just Say No to the Big Ten.

Terry my theory is that if ND ever joins a conference it will be one they help form. I think that it is possible Texas and ND form their own conference from schools in the ACC and B12, plus possibly some from outside it. They would wield more power that way than they ever could joining an existing conference and the same is true for Texas. Dodds is on record on video saying that they had discussions about doing this with ND around 2010. I think it would be the only way to sell losing FB independence to the ND fan base. What do you think? How would that go over with Irish alums and fans?

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Now if the B12 gave up 2 schools say Oklahoma State and WVU and could get FSU and Clemson then this might work. If Syracuse was selected by the B1G over GT like you proposed.
Divisons for the non-eastern schools might get zippered for competitive reasons bu listing them is enough.

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Missouri, Tennessee, Vanderbilt, West Virginia
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Oklahoma State, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, FSU
Brigham Young, Iowa State, Cincinnati, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma,
Baylor, New Mexico, UNLV/Nevada/CSU, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

No Rice and CSU. No more Texas schools. New Mexico or UNLV would be better (both have competitive BB programs). UCF would be perfect, but with Miami and FSU no reason to add a third FL school. That is a really solid conference and gained FL, GA, SC, PA, OH, KY, Utah, NV/CO, NM and lost just WV.

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

(03-05-2014 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

I agree conference realignment is a sports soap opera for college sports fans. Lot of fun to speculate and guess what will happen or what might happen. Just wish my conference was in the B1G's or SEC's shoes instead of being the conference under assault which means I have to speculate more on where my school's future lies.

Maybe markets will matter less in the future and the value of programs will be the prime driver. If that happens FSU and Clemson are much more attractive to the SEC and networks. From a SEC fan point of view I agree that Clemson, FSU, OU, and Texas are great fits.

If UNC moves I think it will be to the SEC over the B1G. Claimed OSU insiders say the B1G was not happy with UNC this last time around. That UNC slow played them to get time to save the ACC. That GT and Kansas are preferred now to pair with UVA (I take that with a grain of salt). UNC also considers itself a southern school which makes the SEC a better fit culturally. I think NCST never gets to sniff the SEC because UNC fears them in the SEC and controls their shared board. UNC and Duke would be great for SEC BB. You would have 3 of the blue bloods of college BB while nobody else has more than one (KU, UCLA, Indiana). UVA and UNC would be the home run though from the SECN point of view.

(03-05-2014 11:30 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

I agree conference realignment is a sports soap opera for college sports fans. Lot of fun to speculate and guess what will happen or what might happen. Just wish my conference was in the B1G's or SEC's shoes instead of being the conference under assault which means I have to speculate more on where my school's future lies.

Maybe markets will matter less in the future and the value of programs will be the prime driver. If that happens FSU and Clemson are much more attractive to the SEC and networks. From a SEC fan point of view I agree that Clemson, FSU, OU, and Texas are great fits.

If UNC moves I think it will be to the SEC over the B1G. Claimed OSU insiders say the B1G was not happy with UNC this last time around. That UNC slow played them to get time to save the ACC. That GT and Kansas are preferred now (I take that with a grain of salt). UNC also considers itself a southern school which makes the SEC a better fit culturally. I think NCST never gets to sniff the SEC because UNC fears them in the SEC and controls their shared board. UNC and Duke would be great for SEC BB. You would have 3 of the blue bloods of college BB while nobody else has more than one (KU, UCLA, Indiana). UVA and UNC would be the home run though from the SECN point of view.

I could live with U.N.C. and Duke as #19 & #20, or U.N.C. and Virginia. But like I said our interests are too divergent. Georgia Tech and Purdue would be like twins living in different locations. And I do think your Jayhawks fit the Big 10 well. Let's say that North Carolina, Duke, Florida State and Clemson came on board from the ACC and Texas and Oklahoma from the Big 12. I believe even Slive would consider that a grand slam.

(03-05-2014 11:47 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 11:30 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

I agree conference realignment is a sports soap opera for college sports fans. Lot of fun to speculate and guess what will happen or what might happen. Just wish my conference was in the B1G's or SEC's shoes instead of being the conference under assault which means I have to speculate more on where my school's future lies.

Maybe markets will matter less in the future and the value of programs will be the prime driver. If that happens FSU and Clemson are much more attractive to the SEC and networks. From a SEC fan point of view I agree that Clemson, FSU, OU, and Texas are great fits.

If UNC moves I think it will be to the SEC over the B1G. Claimed OSU insiders say the B1G was not happy with UNC this last time around. That UNC slow played them to get time to save the ACC. That GT and Kansas are preferred now (I take that with a grain of salt). UNC also considers itself a southern school which makes the SEC a better fit culturally. I think NCST never gets to sniff the SEC because UNC fears them in the SEC and controls their shared board. UNC and Duke would be great for SEC BB. You would have 3 of the blue bloods of college BB while nobody else has more than one (KU, UCLA, Indiana). UVA and UNC would be the home run though from the SECN point of view.

I could live with U.N.C. and Duke as #19 & #20, or U.N.C. and Virginia. But like I said our interests are too divergent. Georgia Tech and Purdue would be like twins living in different locations. And I do think your Jayhawks fit the Big 10 well. Let's say that North Carolina, Duke, Florida State and Clemson came on board from the ACC and Texas and Oklahoma from the Big 12. I believe even Slive would consider that a grand slam.

That would be a grand slam for the SEC. It would cement the SEC has the best sports conference. For football, probably permanently hold the mantle of best FB conference, it would have a better top 4 programs than any other conference in BB which would probably result in it being the #1 BB conference in a decade or so as recruits go to lesser SEC BB programs to play the big dogs, and baseball would be #1 as well probably.

(03-05-2014 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

JR, interesting wrap up!
There are many in the ACC that would love to let you have Florida State and nobody would bat an eye.
I recall several years ago when it was all the rage that Florida State would go to the Big 12. A friend of mine who is a Carolina grad with the very best contact at Grandover and extremely deep roots at Georgia Tech commented "good if Florida State leaves, maybe we can pick up Vanderbilt". The point being that there would be no tears for Florida State and we could find a better fit.
Your problem is Clemson. Regardless of what you read on this board written by Clemson fans, in all likelyhood the Tigers aren't going anywhere. There is overwhelming support among the faculty and administrators for staying in the ACC.
So, take the whiny prima donna and send us Florida or if you prefer South Carolina plus Vanderbilt and we'll all be happy. Then you could have West Virginia (and Louisville ) just to round out the east.

XLance, Vanderbilt fits the ACC like a glove, especially if FSU were to be the swap. Let's make the trade. We'll even send a shipment of Goo Goo Clusters to the ACC offices.

(03-06-2014 11:05 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  XLance, Vanderbilt fits the ACC like a glove, especially if FSU were to be the swap. Let's make the trade. We'll even send a shipment of Goo Goo Clusters to the ACC offices.

Touche! Vandy for F.S.U. and then we pick up Texas and Oklahoma and call it quits. That works wonderfully to 16. Then my second choice would be Vandy for F.S.U. and we pick up Oklahoma and Kansas and call it quits. It simplifies everything really.

I can foresee one problem however. Once F.S.U. was in the SEC it wouldn't take those Clemson administrators very long to feel like they had made the mistake of a lifetime.

(03-06-2014 09:24 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 09:56 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 08:58 PM)jhawkmvp Wrote:  

(03-05-2014 10:47 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Just take a moment and forget about which schools would like go where and just focus on the numbers. I doubt seriously that the PAC goes beyond 12 without Texas and Oklahoma and Texas says they aren't going West. So if the PAC stays at 12 what happens in the East?

Texas wants to be the hub of their own conference, but they want to be the hub of a conference that is more competitive in the market place.

The Big 10 wants more Eastern market development as does the SEC.

The ACC network just is progressing as they might have hoped.

Both the ACC and Big 12 has disparate strata. The Big 12 is Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas at the top layer, Oklahoma State, Iowa State, Kansas State, and Texas Tech at the next layer. West Virginia on its own. And then Baylor followed closely by T.C.U.

The ACC is Virginia and North Carolina followed closely by Duke athletically. Reverse that order academically. Then you have Virginia Tech, Clemson, Georgia Tech, N.C. State, Pitt and Florida State. Syracuse is the best private behind Duke. Then Miami. Then Boston College and Wake Forest. Then Louisville.

The earning potentials of these different layers of schools will eventually separate them or at least remix them.

If the SEC and Big 10 both simply move to 16 there will be too many markets and too many schools left out. If the PAC stays at 12 it becomes very possible to realign the East and accommodate 66 schools plus Notre Dame. If the PAC stays at 12 then 18 becomes the sweet spot for the Eastern conferences.

At 18 you drop the 4 x 4 pod idea and simply move to 3 geographically based divisions of 6 per conference. 5 divisional games and 2 rotating games against each other division allows all 18 schools to play one another every three years and provides for a wild card in a 4 team conference championship round. The wild card keeps many more fan bases energized late into the season as that final spot is up for grabs. This also keeps viewing audiences riveted and keeps advertising revenue up. The wild card also helps to balance inequity in divisional strength within the conference. Geographical groupings will be more important than ever to help with women's sports and minor sports travel expenses. The additional 4 teams will help conference networks hit sweet spots.

With cooperation we could see 3 stronger 18 team conferences arise in the East.

Big 10:
Duke, Maryland, North Carolina, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Purdue, Syracuse
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

SEC:
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Florida State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M

Big 12:
Boston College, Georgia Tech, Louisville, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Iowa State, Colorado State, Kansas, Kansas St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
Baylor, Brigham Young, Rice, Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

But in post realignment with the GOR's in the hands of the networks such a broad final move could be possible. And the LHN is growing in distribution and is viable. The ACCN concept less so.

I don't think UNC ends up in the B1G; however, if they do and Duke and UVA go too, then GT will as well, especially if Clemson and FSU went to the SEC. The B1G likes GT much more than Syracuse who they could have taken previously if they really wanted them, plus they just lost AAU status and GT recently gained it. The B1G really likes GT.

The B12 would never take a 5th school in Texas in Rice. Four is really too many. Originally Texas wanted to just join the Big 8 with A&M until political pressure forced TTU and Baylor along. CSU is not ready for a power conference and won't be for awhile. Where does ND end up? If they ended up a partial to the B12 the B12 would probably look something like this roughly.

Boston College, Syracuse, UConn/UCF, Miami, Pittsburgh, West Virginia
Brigham Young, Cincinnati/UCF, Iowa State, Louisville, Kansas, KSU
Baylor, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas, Texas Christian, Texas Tech

To be honest I hate that conference. Despise it actually. This would never happen. KU, OU and Texas would be better off moving to the PAC, SEC, or B1G rather than being stuck with this bloated conference. Really when KU is still the 3rd most valuable school and you have added 8 more schools that is a bad move. It would only work, maybe, if ND joined fully and even then probably 12 is better than 18 to cut 6 extra mouths to feed. The B12 got all the weakest ACC schools which does nothing to help narrow the gap with the SEC and B1G who got even stronger. The B12 has to have a SE pod of 4-6 ACC schools (including FSU and Clemson) to make expanding to 16 or more work.

Yeah, things are slow and playing around is a good distraction.

Seriously though the SEC West was intentionally constructed to one day lure Texas and Oklahoma. But if Texas got an N.D. deal to the ACC and could take a couple of Texas schools with them then Oklahoma and Kansas would complete the SEC West just fine.

In the end if the SEC goes to 16 we only really have 4 targets and 2 outside possibilities. We want Texas and Oklahoma, or North Carolina and Duke, yes I said Duke. When Maryland bolted we held discussions with North Carolina who was feeling out contingency plans if further defections occurred. Their price for admission to the SEC was Duke and I think we would have done it. We would rather have had Virginia and North Carolina.

Two years ago there was talk of moving to 20 by offering Virginia, Virginia Tech, Duke, North Carolina and N.C. State. The only way to make that profitable was to take Pitt as well. It didn't bring wild enthusiasm from the fans or the university offices per se. The academics were great, but the home attendance for football of those schools, the average travel crowds for them, and their product just wasn't up to the SEC norm.

SEC folks don't care who we get in North Carolina. Most would prefer Virginia Tech over Virginia. But almost all SEC fans see the best two fits as Clemson and Florida State. Texas would be the school we would love to hate. Oklahoma would be welcomed. And Kansas would be seen for what it was, a stellar basketball addition.

Truth be told most folks down here would be more excited over West Virginia and Louisville than N.C. State, Virginia, Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, Wake Forest, Pitt, Syracuse, or B.C.. In fact they would be more up for Oklahoma State or Baylor than most of those.

Mike Slive and the university presidents are interested in Duke, North Carolina, and Virginia; Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas. We'll see.

What I can tell you with certainty is that folks will grow fond of Missouri in time. Everybody was excited about Texas A&M. If the SEC wanted to please it's fans it would move to 16 with Florida State and Clemson and everyone would love the new 16 team SEC.

It's only the networks that have us talking about North Carolina and Virginia, but none of the fan base is particularly excited about any of those schools.

The only satisfactory conclusion left for the fans outside of Clemson and Florida State would be Texas and Oklahoma. And if we went to 18 those 4 would be perfection. We would have more in common with those fans than with any of the others and the travel would be better for both the Eastern and Western teams.

I'm just an old guy who has enjoyed the conjecture and the wacky drama that realignment brings. As a sociologist I've enjoyed watching the extraneous factors that have enabled the moves to take place and have winced at just how much abuse the American sports fan has had to put up with while lifelong traditions have been tossed aside for the buck. Corporate influence over the public is out of control and I had hoped that realignment would bring it to a head and that good change would result. Those hopes are fading.

But when realignment is over it becomes a marriage. Dating the ideas of North Carolina and Virginia might be intriguing but those aren't the faces I want to wake up next to year after year because when the flirtations are over we have very little in common to build upon other than being owned mutually by ESPN. For Texas and Oklahoma it would be a reunion with Arkansas, Texas A&M, Missouri, and to a lesser extent but a much older degree, L.S.U.. For Florida State and Clemson it would be like dad's illegitimate children were finally fully adopted into the family and their past omissions were finally righted. Should the Big 12 be our only target in the future and we need to go to 4 I would be happy with Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and any of the following: Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas or West Virginia.

So now you know what I truly think. My preferences to 16 are:
1. Florida State & Clemson
2. Texas & Oklahoma
3. Oklahoma & Kansas

to 18 my preferences are:
1. Florida State, Clemson, Texas & Oklahoma
2. Florida State, Clemson, Oklahoma & Kansas
3. Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, & any of the others I've listed.

The rest of the possibilities will just ruin the SEC in the long run as they will graft schools that really don't fit us, awkwardly into our family. JR

JR, interesting wrap up!
There are many in the ACC that would love to let you have Florida State and nobody would bat an eye.
I recall several years ago when it was all the rage that Florida State would go to the Big 12. A friend of mine who is a Carolina grad with the very best contact at Grandover and extremely deep roots at Georgia Tech commented "good if Florida State leaves, maybe we can pick up Vanderbilt". The point being that there would be no tears for Florida State and we could find a better fit.
Your problem is Clemson. Regardless of what you read on this board written by Clemson fans, in all likelyhood the Tigers aren't going anywhere. There is overwhelming support among the faculty and administrators for staying in the ACC.
So, take the whiny prima donna and send us Florida or if you prefer South Carolina plus Vanderbilt and we'll all be happy. Then you could have West Virginia (and Louisville ) just to round out the east.

XLance I realize there is a bit of sarcasm in there, but I also realize that there is a lot of truth. The SEC and later the ACC split out of the Southern Conference for good reasons. While both of us are Southern we truly are more like cousins than brothers. Right now the ACC would be the nations unabashed premier basketball conference without Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson and Miami and with Louisville, Connecticut, Vanderbilt, and perhaps Kentucky for good measure.

The additions you guys made trying to be more balanced actually divided your culture. Virginia Tech will adapt. Miami is a total outlier, but would be in the SEC as well. Clemson may be part of you historically but their sports culture on campus is closer to that of an SEC school. F.S.U. is a prima donna because the are the only football darling and that is why they were picked in the first place. They would be very good in the SEC and a regular contender, but they wouldn't be the prettiest girl at the dance every time.

I think if the SEC goes the route of trying to add basketball first schools we will be committing the same mistake that the ACC has already committed. I'm totally fine with you guys being the best basketball conference in the nation and the SEC being the best in football. Our rivalry with each other could be easily built around the diamond and it would be a true rivalry. So I think there is a lot of truth in your remarks just as there was in mine. But just because I pointed out that West Virginia and Louisville would be more appealing to the average SEC fan than some of the ACC schools doesn't mean we prefer them over anyone else. Take care.

(03-06-2014 12:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 11:05 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  XLance, Vanderbilt fits the ACC like a glove, especially if FSU were to be the swap. Let's make the trade. We'll even send a shipment of Goo Goo Clusters to the ACC offices.

Touche! Vandy for F.S.U. and then we pick up Texas and Oklahoma and call it quits. That works wonderfully to 16. Then my second choice would be Vandy for F.S.U. and we pick up Oklahoma and Kansas and call it quits. It simplifies everything really.

I can foresee one problem however. Once F.S.U. was in the SEC it wouldn't take those Clemson administrators very long to feel like they had made the mistake of a lifetime.

Twice in my career Banks that my company did business with split when the dashing execuitive VP siphoned off some of the best, most aggressive, and youngest employees to go and start up other banks. Both ended up being successful. The young folks that were selected to move to the new venture for the most part were successful and made a lot of money. BUT......many of the employees that were not selected or decided not to move to the new venture with the dashing execuitive VP were even MORE successful. You see when all of those talented folks left, it created a management vacuum in the older established bank. The folks that were either left behind or chose to stay behind ended up in much better positions than their counterparts and actually made more money too. Such will be the case with Clemson. They won't feel that they have made a mistake because they will assend back to the top of the ACC football heap where they were before Florida State moved them out of their rightful spot. Clemson will again be #1 in a good, not great football conference and that will be just fine with the Tigers. The vacuum at the top with Florida State's departure would allow Clemson to again be "top dog" in ACC football, a spot they lost and would love to get back.
Believe me there would be very few tears in Tigertown after they realized what had really happened.

(03-06-2014 01:53 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 12:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 11:05 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  XLance, Vanderbilt fits the ACC like a glove, especially if FSU were to be the swap. Let's make the trade. We'll even send a shipment of Goo Goo Clusters to the ACC offices.

Touche! Vandy for F.S.U. and then we pick up Texas and Oklahoma and call it quits. That works wonderfully to 16. Then my second choice would be Vandy for F.S.U. and we pick up Oklahoma and Kansas and call it quits. It simplifies everything really.

I can foresee one problem however. Once F.S.U. was in the SEC it wouldn't take those Clemson administrators very long to feel like they had made the mistake of a lifetime.

Twice in my career Banks that my company did business with split when the dashing execuitive VP siphoned off some of the best, most aggressive, and youngest employees to go and start up other banks. Both ended up being successful. The young folks that were selected to move to the new venture for the most part were successful and made a lot of money. BUT......many of the employees that were not selected or decided not to move to the new venture with the dashing execuitive VP were even MORE successful. You see when all of those talented folks left, it created a management vacuum in the older established bank. The folks that were either left behind or chose to stay behind ended up in much better positions than their counterparts and actually made more money too. Such will be the case with Clemson. They won't feel that they have made a mistake because they will assend back to the top of the ACC football heap where they were before Florida State moved them out of their rightful spot. Clemson will again be #1 in a good, not great football conference and that will be just fine with the Tigers. The vacuum at the top with Florida State's departure would allow Clemson to again be "top dog" in ACC football, a spot they lost and would love to get back.
Believe me there would be very few tears in Tigertown after they realized what had really happened.

Yes, I had considered that too. There would be a great risk in moving to a football rich conference in which they might not even regain the top position in their own state, let alone the conference.

Good illustration XLance. I think it would apply to Kentucky leaving the SEC where they are king to make a move to a talent rich ACC.

The upside that would come from such a move would be simply from added content value, but if that came at the price of alienating your fan base with regular .500 seasons instead of regular 10 win seasons then it wouldn't be worth it.

I don't think Clemson would be the only one to benefit by F.S.U.'s departure. The playing field would become much more level encouraging other schools to try to step up their level of competition. North Carolina, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech and even Virginia and Pitt fans might get more solidly behind trying to knock Clemson off of their perch (a feat that would seemingly be much more attainable than knocking F.S.U. off of theirs). Leveling the competitiveness of the conference would serve as a stimulus for competition.

Look at what has happened in the Big 12. As Texas and Oklahoma recruiting has sagged Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and Kansas State have all stepped up their game. Why? It finally looked like the efforts would pay off, and they have.

By the way I take it that you didn't disagree with me about Miami. They will eventually degrade to the extent that they become the ACC equivalent of West Virginia in the Big 12. They will be a good school that remains competitive, but nowhere near like they were at their peak, but very expensive to travel to for any sport. Central Florida will surpass them within a decade, maybe two. Of all of the growth prospects out there I like UCF. The number of alumni, the vacation destination of their home town, the access they provide to a solid recruiting area, the average age of the people in their area, all surpass the potential of either Miami, or South Florida. I could see them easily passing Florida State in prominence in half a century and eventually challenging Florida. Mid Florida has so much more to offer than the Panhandle or the Keys.

(03-06-2014 02:09 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 01:53 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 12:05 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(03-06-2014 11:05 AM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  XLance, Vanderbilt fits the ACC like a glove, especially if FSU were to be the swap. Let's make the trade. We'll even send a shipment of Goo Goo Clusters to the ACC offices.

Touche! Vandy for F.S.U. and then we pick up Texas and Oklahoma and call it quits. That works wonderfully to 16. Then my second choice would be Vandy for F.S.U. and we pick up Oklahoma and Kansas and call it quits. It simplifies everything really.

I can foresee one problem however. Once F.S.U. was in the SEC it wouldn't take those Clemson administrators very long to feel like they had made the mistake of a lifetime.

Twice in my career Banks that my company did business with split when the dashing execuitive VP siphoned off some of the best, most aggressive, and youngest employees to go and start up other banks. Both ended up being successful. The young folks that were selected to move to the new venture for the most part were successful and made a lot of money. BUT......many of the employees that were not selected or decided not to move to the new venture with the dashing execuitive VP were even MORE successful. You see when all of those talented folks left, it created a management vacuum in the older established bank. The folks that were either left behind or chose to stay behind ended up in much better positions than their counterparts and actually made more money too. Such will be the case with Clemson. They won't feel that they have made a mistake because they will assend back to the top of the ACC football heap where they were before Florida State moved them out of their rightful spot. Clemson will again be #1 in a good, not great football conference and that will be just fine with the Tigers. The vacuum at the top with Florida State's departure would allow Clemson to again be "top dog" in ACC football, a spot they lost and would love to get back.
Believe me there would be very few tears in Tigertown after they realized what had really happened.

Yes, I had considered that too. There would be a great risk in moving to a football rich conference in which they might not even regain the top position in their own state, let alone the conference.

Good illustration XLance. I think it would apply to Kentucky leaving the SEC where they are king to make a move to a talent rich ACC.

The upside that would come from such a move would be simply from added content value, but if that came at the price of alienating your fan base with regular .500 seasons instead of regular 10 win seasons then it wouldn't be worth it.

I don't think Clemson would be the only one to benefit by F.S.U.'s departure. The playing field would become much more level encouraging other schools to try to step up their level of competition. North Carolina, N.C. State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech and even Virginia and Pitt fans might get more solidly behind trying to knock Clemson off of their perch (a feat that would seemingly be much more attainable than knocking F.S.U. off of theirs). Leveling the competitiveness of the conference would serve as a stimulus for competition.

Look at what has happened in the Big 12. As Texas and Oklahoma recruiting has sagged Baylor, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and Kansas State have all stepped up their game. Why? It finally looked like the efforts would pay off, and they have.

By the way I take it that you didn't disagree with me about Miami. They will eventually degrade to the extent that they become the ACC equivalent of West Virginia in the Big 12. They will be a good school that remains competitive, but nowhere near like they were at their peak, but very expensive to travel to for any sport. Central Florida will surpass them within a decade, maybe two. Of all of the growth prospects out there I like UCF. The number of alumni, the vacation destination of their home town, the access they provide to a solid recruiting area, the average age of the people in their area, all surpass the potential of either Miami, or South Florida. I could see them easily passing Florida State in prominence in half a century and eventually challenging Florida. Mid Florida has so much more to offer than the Panhandle or the Keys.

Re: Miami
First let me say that Miami is in the ACC for the long haul. At this point Miami would be foolish to look anywhere else (besides why would they want to leave all of the other privates)?
I think that Miami can be salvaged, but it will take investment (that so far they have been unwilling to do). Miami has terrible facilities...terrible (except for their new basketball arena). If they would follow UCF's example and build an on campus football stadium that would seat between 32,000 (Wake Forest size) and 40,000 (UCF size) along with the other ancillary facilities they could again command major media attention. Maybe not to their glorious past, but they may come close. BTW, Miami does not have to become the Miami of old to be of great benefit to the ACC.
I agree that UCF has great potential in central Florida, and may be a good partner for Florida in several years. The school is already too big to fit the ACC profile (as is USF).
You're still going to have to throw the chickens in with Vandy, if for no other reason than to keep the Tigers happy, besides your getting Florida State. And then with Notre Dame we are at 16 and done.
I'm thinking that the SEC's best play might just be for Texas and Kansas (instead of Oklahoma) at that point. You really don't need another top football program, but you could use the academic cache and the hoops to finally give Kentucky some conference competition. My respects to the Florida fans, I know they have good hoops and have a couple of NCAA championships, but it is really hard to think of Florida as a basketball school....don't you think?
I realize that this leaves you at 15 and I know the SEC has an aversion to private schools (religious ones at that) otherwise I would suggest Baylor as your #16. So in that case, I'm going with Texas Tech.