(08-13-2014 11:04 AM)jhawkmvp Wrote: This is why i think the next move will be radical. I think the next moves will eliminate a conference or two and will require the surviving conferences to accept most of the the B12 and/or ACC (4 or 2/3 conference model) due to GoR issues. If most of those ACC schools could double their TV money and have a place in the power structure do they still all remain unified? Almost half have joined in roughly the past decade from the Big East. So it is not like those schools have 25+ years together in the ACC, outside of the VA/NC schools for the most part. I think right now they stay unified, like mentioned, because many are worried they will lose their place at the table (as well as the fact the money discrepancy has not widened to critical levels yet). If all, or nearly all, are taken care of I think they jump at the extra money once the gap really starts to widen. JRSec's scenario lays out how it could happen well.
Financial pressure is only going to increase with the changes coming to the power conferences (stipends, trusts, maybe more depending on cases coming in the near future). The ACC is going to suffer the most under this new pressure. The B12 ADs are more profitable and less subsidized than the ACC ADs and, IMO, better equipped, in general, to handle the new financial pressures. Before August I would have put the odds as the ACC surviving over the B12 by a 2 or 3 to 1 margin. Now I think it is close to dead even on who survives. The B12 geography and lack of cohesion still hurts it, even though, financially, it is stronger. Who knows, maybe they both die in a 2-3 conference model.
Along with financial pressure you have to ask these questions. Would B.C., Pitt, Syracuse, and yes Notre Dame be more interested in a 10 school Eastern Division of the Big 10 that looked like this:
Boston College, Duke/U.N.C., Maryland, Notre Dame, Penn State, Pittsburgh, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse, Virginia
and would the Old Big 10 be happier with a Western Division like this:
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio State, Wisconsin.
Travel will play an important part of keeping expenses down and maximizing profits. Traditional games will keep attendance higher. You look at these two groupings and you realize that travel between most of them is either already accepted, or is reasonably compact as in the East. Plus those are the games that the fans of those schools want most to see.
Ditto in the South:
SEC West:
Alabama, Auburn, Arkansas, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas A&M, Vanderbilt
SEC East:
Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kentucky, Miami, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia Tech
Both sides have access to Florida and Florida State gets two massive sellouts with Auburn and Alabama. 4 divisions makes any of these scenarios even more regional.
I think that where we are headed economically, that travel, home crowds, and overhead will all become bigger issues. And I contend what better way to keep fans energized than to give them the games they really want annually.
And there is even something to be said for a PAC similarly configured:
Arizona, Arizona State, California, Cal Los Angeles, Oregon, Oregon State, Southern Cal, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
Baylor, Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, Utah
Even in the wide open spaces of the West and Mid West the two divisions basically stay what most people expect in the way of travel and represent schools they are most accustomed to playing.
Of all of the regions the SEC would be the one that could most easily accommodate 24 schools. Take the mix presented and add Louisville, West Virginia, one more of N.C. State, U.N.C., & Duke, and either Baylor or T.C.U. and you reduce the P5 to a P4 and the field from 65 to 64.