So you don’t think the ACC and later the Big Ten’s decision was motivated at all by the fact that the SEC was already there and they felt obliged to keep pace?

I don’t think the ACC blazes the trail to 14 first. The ACC has had a track record of being risk adverse and being a trend follower as opposed to trend setter (outside of basketball). Supposedly there was also concern that an 8-team Big 12 was sniffing in their backyard and they were trying to protect the East Coast from encroachment. If the Big 12 isn’t shopping for schools no pre-emotive ACC strike.

Same story with the Big 10—they were the last to go to 14

(11-29-2020 09:53 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 04:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  "...treason."

The only response of any importance is that, in the interests of comity, you should be tasked by one of the moderators to delete the misbegotten and hateful words that you mistakenly opted to append at the end of your posts.

You can change the site settings so that signatures don't appear for you. I had to do that when too many people started dragging their politics into everywhere they posted. Also, some sigs contain obnoxiously large images.

(11-30-2020 12:14 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 09:53 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 04:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  "...treason."

The only response of any importance is that, in the interests of comity, you should be tasked by one of the moderators to delete the misbegotten and hateful words that you mistakenly opted to append at the end of your posts.

You can change the site settings so that signatures don't appear for you. I had to do that when too many people started dragging their politics into everywhere they posted. Also, some sigs contain obnoxiously large images.

This is the soundest advice, as I will treat responses such as Jed's to signatures as bringing up politics on this forum, which inevitably leads to a terminal conclusion.

If a poster brings up politics in a response to a thread that is an offense. If it is in their signature it can be turned off.

Here’s another what if: Notre Dame joins the Big Ten in 2000

Apparently this was close to happening until the donor base nixed it. So here we go:

The Big Ten goes to 12 and institutes a CCG in 2000. I’m guessing the do some sort of zipper format since the East would be stacked.

ND’s departure after 5 years in the Big East doesn’t have a huge impact. VT still becomes a full member in 2000, effectively replacing ND as the 13th member as opposed to the 14th. (VT was added at this time because the NCAA was requiring that FBS conferences have 8 full members playing football—VT was #7, UConn was in the process of upgrading to be #8)

2004: The same 3 schools leave the Big East for the ACC but BC’s membership isn’t delayed a year due NC St’s chancellor pulling that 11th hour No vote in order to try and open a door for ND.

2004 and not 2005 becomes the watershed realignment year due the Big East’s urgent need for 3 football members.

USF, Cincinnati, and Louisville all join the Big East on the football side. DePaul, Marquette, and St Louis are the 3 basketball adds. (Charlotte goes to the A-10 alone, everything else proceeds as it did in 2005)

2011 is where I think things get interesting—
I think there is a very good chance that the Big Ten isn’t even looking to expand that year. Larry Scott still wants to—the PAC 16 still fails but he does swipe away Colorado and rounds out with Utah. I think a lot of possible things can happen here.

Option 1: they simply plug in a replacement for Colorado (likely TCU or BYU) and move on and that’s it [at a minimum I think this has to happen because the Big 12 needs a 12th school to play in order to host the 2011 CCG]
Option 2: TAMU leaves in 2012 for the SEC—paired with WVU. The rest of the Big 12 stands pat
Option 3: TAMU’s announced move sends everyone in a panic. I can see Nebraska and Missouri trying to get in the Big Ten as a set, I can see Missouri simultaneously talking with the SEC. I can even see Texas/TTU/Oklahoma/OK St to the PAC 12 sliding in as an option.

If Option 1 happens we have a pretty calm rest of the decade. We have 5 BCS conferences of 12 members and then the 8 member Big East. The non-BCS conferences stay much as they were from 2005-2010 except the MWC has a couple of the top WAC schools and the WAC has UTSA and Texas St. A ton of schools are still in FCS: ODU, Liberty, Charlotte, App St, Georgia St, Georgia Southern, Coastal Carolina

Option 2 is only a real possibility if Oklahoma and Oklahoma St suddenly swing their voting block allegiances away from Austin and back with the 5 ex-Big 8 schools. Those 7 would have numbers on Texas block of Texas/TTU/Baylor/TCU(TCU replaces Colorado). In which case, I think BYU becomes the 12th member of the Big 12.

Option 3 has so many potential outcomes including a Big 10 of 16 members with Nebraska, Missouri, Maryland, and Rutgers as the last 4 in. You could also see an alignment that looks a lot like ours now with TAMU and Missouri in the SEC, Maryland and Rutgers in the Big 10, Pitt, Cuse, and WVU/L’ville in the ACC, the only real difference being that Nebraska is still in a 10 member Big 12 (instead of WVU)—if you’re Oklahoma that’s a pretty nice set up—all 3 of your biggest rivals (Texas, Oklahoma St, and Nebraska) all as annual contests.

The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

Here’s a crazy one from 1975!

Richmond Talks New Athletic Conference

Apparently, Richmond wanted to go big-time in football and it never happened. This is one of the reasons they left the SoCon. When they first announced their departure, they wanted to basically start the precursor to the Metro, but with divisions:

Richmond
William & Mary
VaTech
WVU
East Carolina

Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
So. Miss
South Carolina

The Liberty Bowl was desired as a tie-in.

Western Carolina was going to be UR’s replacement in the SoCon, but there was some resistance. Ultimately, W&M and ECU went Indy as well.

A similar conference was talked about in subsequent years, but it didn’t involve Cincy, Louisville, and Memphis.

(12-01-2020 09:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

If the Big 10 then adds Nebraska in 2011 perhaps they take Oklahoma with them.

The SEC then picks up Texas, Kansas, Missouri and A&M and both stand at 16.

(12-01-2020 09:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 09:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

If the Big 10 then adds Nebraska in 2011 perhaps they take Oklahoma with them.

The SEC then picks up Texas, Kansas, Missouri and A&M and both stand at 16.

I’m torn on the Nebraska in 2011 add because that move was made specifically because A) The Big Ten wanted a CCG B ) The Big Ten had made their desire to expand months prior C) Nebraska was nervous over the PAC 16, pissed at Texas, and moving to the Big Ten for both parties’ needs.

I’m not sure if Nebraska cold calls Jim Delany in June 2010, after a decade of successful Big Ten CCGs, and says hey can I join that we see Nebraska playing Big Ten football in 2011.

The 2012 season is a different story. If TAMU and the SEC have already crossed the 12 member Rubicon and are looking at 14 I can definitely see Nebraska and the Big Ten making a move then. I tend to think that the Missouri Tigers are the Big 10’s #14. Oklahoma would be nice but I’m not sure that would have happened. Oklahoma to the SEC that year? That could be interesting. If they take Oklahoma at 14 and the Big 10’s grabbed 2 that leaves a Big 12 of Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, Texas, TTU, Baylor, and probably TCU. If you take the Oklahoma schools as 14 and 15 as a package the pressure is on Texas to be #16 or get left behind.

(12-01-2020 09:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

You could zipper it several ways but I think you’d want to break up Mich/Ohio St/Penn St/ND so each division had 2 but each of the 4 had one of the others as a protected crossover to help balance the schedules and maximize tv value.

Ohio St——Penn St
Michigan—-ND
Mich St——Minnesota
Indiana——Purdue
Illinois——-NW
Iowa———-Wisconsin

I didn’t protect the Land Grant or Mich St-ND game but you can only protect so many games. Mich St does keep Mich, Ohio St, and their trophy game with Indiana.

(12-01-2020 09:17 PM)esayem Wrote:  Here’s a crazy one from 1975!

Richmond Talks New Athletic Conference

Apparently, Richmond wanted to go big-time in football and it never happened. This is one of the reasons they left the SoCon. When they first announced their departure, they wanted to basically start the precursor to the Metro, but with divisions:

Richmond
William & Mary
VaTech
WVU
East Carolina

Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
So. Miss
South Carolina

The Liberty Bowl was desired as a tie-in.

Western Carolina was going to be UR’s replacement in the SoCon, but there was some resistance. Ultimately, W&M and ECU went Indy as well.

A similar conference was talked about in subsequent years, but it didn’t involve Cincy, Louisville, and Memphis.

So in essence, Richmond and their (at the time) buddies ECU, W&M, and VT were hoping to be part of the Metro when it was founded in 1975 but Cincy/Memphis/Louisville/Tulane passed them over for GT and FSU but without the commitment of a football conference.

VT, SC, and USM would later get to join the Metro but no such luck for W&M or Richmond.

There was so much interesting potential with the Metro that just never was realized. Imagine if GT, SC, Florida St, and Miami had gotten together and started a football sponsoring conference in 1975? They could have overshadowed and then raided the ACC!

(12-01-2020 09:43 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 09:23 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 09:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

If the Big 10 then adds Nebraska in 2011 perhaps they take Oklahoma with them.

The SEC then picks up Texas, Kansas, Missouri and A&M and both stand at 16.

I’m torn on the Nebraska in 2011 add because that move was made specifically because A) The Big Ten wanted a CCG B ) The Big Ten had made their desire to expand months prior C) Nebraska was nervous over the PAC 16, pissed at Texas, and moving to the Big Ten for both parties’ needs.

I’m not sure if Nebraska cold calls Jim Delany in June 2010, after a decade of successful Big Ten CCGs, and says hey can I join that we see Nebraska playing Big Ten football in 2011.

The 2012 season is a different story. If TAMU and the SEC have already crossed the 12 member Rubicon and are looking at 14 I can definitely see Nebraska and the Big Ten making a move then. I tend to think that the Missouri Tigers are the Big 10’s #14. Oklahoma would be nice but I’m not sure that would have happened. Oklahoma to the SEC that year? That could be interesting. If they take Oklahoma at 14 and the Big 10’s grabbed 2 that leaves a Big 12 of Iowa St, Kansas, Kansas St, Oklahoma St, Texas, TTU, Baylor, and probably TCU. If you take the Oklahoma schools as 14 and 15 as a package the pressure is on Texas to be #16 or get left behind.

I see your point about the time line. However Missouri had been in talks with the SEC for 2 years by the time they finally joined. ESPN was interested in them. ESPN was also interested in Kansas and Texas. Oklahoma is a nice piece for the Mouse but not a priority in 2010-2. Oklahoma was more of an SEC priority than a network priority. I'm sure CBS would have been fine with the Sooners. But since ESPN controlled the renegotiation clause of the SEC contract and Missouri and A&M satisfied it, only ESPN could have sweetened the deal in order to get Texas and Kansas and I believe that would have been more their desire than Oklahoma.

Now the interesting question would be if Oklahoma doesn't join the Big 10 with Nebraska (which was quite the football coup back then) then does Texas even bite at all on movement? I think not. It would take the Big 10 getting Oklahoma to set any Texas move in motion.

Besides what not to like about these:

Big 10 West: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Ohio Sate, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

Big 10 East: Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers

SEC West: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Missouri, Texas, Texas A&M

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

(12-01-2020 09:51 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 09:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  The divisions could have been something like this:

ND—————-Michigan State
PSU————--Iowa
Purdue———-Wisconsin
Indiana———-Minnesota
N’western——Michigan
Illinois———-Ohio St.

You could zipper it several ways but I think you’d want to break up Mich/Ohio St/Penn St/ND so each division had 2 but each of the 4 had one of the others as a protected crossover to help balance the schedules and maximize tv value.

Ohio St——Penn St
Michigan—-ND
Mich St——Minnesota
Indiana——Purdue
Illinois——-NW
Iowa———-Wisconsin

I didn’t protect the Land Grant or Mich St-ND game but you can only protect so many games. Mich St does keep Mich, Ohio St, and their trophy game with Indiana.

Muskie's divisions are definitely better balanced than Sam's. How's this arrangement instead though?

Central/Midwest
Iowa/Minnesota
Michigan/Ohio State
Michigan State/Penn State
Notre Dame/Wisconsin
Northwestern/Illinois
Purdue/Indiana

This permits ND to play all its historic Big Ten rivals (Michigan, MSU, NW, and Purdue) annually, which is likely going to be key in ensuring ND's membership; preserves the most important Big Ten annual rivalries; is decently balanced, with 4 of the heavy hitters on 1 side and 3 on the other; mostly has competitive protected crossovers; and has respectable division names. The biggest annual rivalry this breaks up is perhaps Iowa/Wisconsin, but the Big Ten itself did that with Legends and Leaders.

I think the Big Ten understood Ohio State and Michigan need to be in the same division. Plus, we have to look at this through a 1999 lens, and Iowa was stinking it up, for instance. Notre Dame vs. MSU and Purdue would have been a requirement, and probably a yearly game vs. Penn State. ND would also want Northwestern. You better believe ND would hand pick their division and they would avoid yearly bouts vs. Michigan and Ohio State. I don’t think any of the heavyweights would be vouching for a challenging cross-division rival.

I’m thinking this is a lock:

Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern

I Filled it out with Indiana and Illinois just because it avoided a rematch the next week, however unlikely. TV would want ND/PSU vs. OSU/Mich every year in the CCG. Much like the ACC tried with FSU vs. Miami.

(12-01-2020 10:01 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 09:17 PM)esayem Wrote:  Here’s a crazy one from 1975!

Richmond Talks New Athletic Conference

Apparently, Richmond wanted to go big-time in football and it never happened. This is one of the reasons they left the SoCon. When they first announced their departure, they wanted to basically start the precursor to the Metro, but with divisions:

Richmond
William & Mary
VaTech
WVU
East Carolina

Cincinnati
Louisville
Memphis
So. Miss
South Carolina

The Liberty Bowl was desired as a tie-in.

Western Carolina was going to be UR’s replacement in the SoCon, but there was some resistance. Ultimately, W&M and ECU went Indy as well.

A similar conference was talked about in subsequent years, but it didn’t involve Cincy, Louisville, and Memphis.

So in essence, Richmond and their (at the time) buddies ECU, W&M, and VT were hoping to be part of the Metro when it was founded in 1975 but Cincy/Memphis/Louisville/Tulane passed them over for GT and FSU but without the commitment of a football conference.

VT, SC, and USM would later get to join the Metro but no such luck for W&M or Richmond.

There was so much interesting potential with the Metro that just never was realized. Imagine if GT, SC, Florida St, and Miami had gotten together and started a football sponsoring conference in 1975? They could have overshadowed and then raided the ACC!

Pretty much, it seems. Then UR tried to spearhead another new conference with some sort of combination of W&M, VMI, VaTech, WVU, ECU, South Carolina, So. Miss, and FSU—before they were scooped up by the Metro.

It’s interesting that UR and W&M made half an effort to avoid 1-AA classification. They left the SoCon, which was in danger of being reclassified, and it actually survived the initial drop when they added WCU, Marshall, and a couple others. UR and W&M upgraded their schedules, but not their facilities. City Stadium was a dump in the 70’s (and they never upgraded it from what I remember), and W&M’s Zable Stadium wasn’t large enough, yet they both avoided initial reclassification. W&M might have slipped by with some Oyster Bowl games. Had they both hung on, I imagine they’d have ended up in a football-only association with the MAC or perhaps changed the direction of the Sun Belt.

In the 90’s, the SoCon talked about moving to 1-A when the 1-AA scholarship cuts were on the table. The two would have been well positioned to form a 1-A league with Marshall, App St., Georgia Southern, and perhaps a few HBCUs that were also looking at making the jump.

(12-01-2020 11:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  I think the Big Ten understood Ohio State and Michigan need to be in the same division. Plus, we have to look at this through a 1999 lens, and Iowa was stinking it up, for instance. Notre Dame vs. MSU and Purdue would have been a requirement, and probably a yearly game vs. Penn State. ND would also want Northwestern. You better believe ND would hand pick their division and they would avoid yearly bouts vs. Michigan and Ohio State. I don’t think any of the heavyweights would be vouching for a challenging cross-division rival.

I’m thinking this is a lock:

Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern

I Filled it out with Indiana and Illinois just because it avoided a rematch the next week, however unlikely. TV would want ND/PSU vs. OSU/Mich every year in the CCG. Much like the ACC tried with FSU vs. Miami.

I don't see the need for OSU and Michigan to be in the same division as long as they have a protected crossover. An advantage of having them in different divisions is that you could have an OSU/Michigan CCG. And for those of you who crave multi-season rematches but inexplicably dislike same-season rematches, perhaps their annual game could be played earlier in the season.

From 1978-1999, Notre Dame played both Michigan and MSU in all but 4 seasons. So I sincerely doubt they'd shirk from having Michigan in the same division. Also, the comparable crossovers are in the interest of fairness and schedule balance.

(12-02-2020 12:10 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 11:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  I think the Big Ten understood Ohio State and Michigan need to be in the same division. Plus, we have to look at this through a 1999 lens, and Iowa was stinking it up, for instance. Notre Dame vs. MSU and Purdue would have been a requirement, and probably a yearly game vs. Penn State. ND would also want Northwestern. You better believe ND would hand pick their division and they would avoid yearly bouts vs. Michigan and Ohio State. I don’t think any of the heavyweights would be vouching for a challenging cross-division rival.

I’m thinking this is a lock:

Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern

I Filled it out with Indiana and Illinois just because it avoided a rematch the next week, however unlikely. TV would want ND/PSU vs. OSU/Mich every year in the CCG. Much like the ACC tried with FSU vs. Miami.

perhaps their annual game could be played earlier in the season.

Columbus and Ann Arbor would’ve burned down if the regular season didn’t end with The Game.

I always felt the SEC should've added Virginia Tech over Missouri to go with Texas A&M. At that point, I'm not sure how realignment plays out. Along with the ACCN, I think UConn should've been the add to the ACC especially when they were decent making a BCS game in the Big East, let the revenue pour in and they would be a big fish in the ACC along with the academics, Louisville seems out of place in the ACC but they are competitive. Big Ten should've never went past 12, I'd probably go with Missouri over Nebraska but hindsight is 20-20.

(12-02-2020 01:00 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-02-2020 12:10 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 11:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  I think the Big Ten understood Ohio State and Michigan need to be in the same division. Plus, we have to look at this through a 1999 lens, and Iowa was stinking it up, for instance. Notre Dame vs. MSU and Purdue would have been a requirement, and probably a yearly game vs. Penn State. ND would also want Northwestern. You better believe ND would hand pick their division and they would avoid yearly bouts vs. Michigan and Ohio State. I don’t think any of the heavyweights would be vouching for a challenging cross-division rival.

I’m thinking this is a lock:

Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern

I Filled it out with Indiana and Illinois just because it avoided a rematch the next week, however unlikely. TV would want ND/PSU vs. OSU/Mich every year in the CCG. Much like the ACC tried with FSU vs. Miami.

perhaps their annual game could be played earlier in the season.

Columbus and Ann Arbor would’ve burned down if the regular season didn’t end with The Game.

Exactly, and a rematch the next week in Indianapolis diminishes its importance.

Nerdlinger: Michigan would be passed over for a yearly game in favor of Penn State and the eastern exposure that game would provide.

Michigan St. would also get preference over Michigan. It’s a longer standing game. Same with Purdue.

(12-02-2020 04:59 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(12-02-2020 01:00 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(12-02-2020 12:10 AM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(12-01-2020 11:31 PM)esayem Wrote:  I think the Big Ten understood Ohio State and Michigan need to be in the same division. Plus, we have to look at this through a 1999 lens, and Iowa was stinking it up, for instance. Notre Dame vs. MSU and Purdue would have been a requirement, and probably a yearly game vs. Penn State. ND would also want Northwestern. You better believe ND would hand pick their division and they would avoid yearly bouts vs. Michigan and Ohio State. I don’t think any of the heavyweights would be vouching for a challenging cross-division rival.

I’m thinking this is a lock:

Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Northwestern

I Filled it out with Indiana and Illinois just because it avoided a rematch the next week, however unlikely. TV would want ND/PSU vs. OSU/Mich every year in the CCG. Much like the ACC tried with FSU vs. Miami.

perhaps their annual game could be played earlier in the season.

Columbus and Ann Arbor would’ve burned down if the regular season didn’t end with The Game.

Exactly, and a rematch the next week in Indianapolis diminishes its importance.

Nerdlinger: Michigan would be passed over for a yearly game in favor of Penn State and the eastern exposure that game would provide.

Michigan St. would also get preference over Michigan. It’s a longer standing game. Same with Purdue.

Easy fix: I just swapped the protected crossovers so ND gets PSU and MSU gets Wisconsin. You'll note that the Central Division has ND, MSU, and Michigan (and Purdue), so it's not like ND has to choose any over the others.

Central/Midwest
Iowa/Minnesota
Michigan/Ohio State
Michigan State/Wisconsin
Northwestern/Illinois
Notre Dame/Penn State
Purdue/Indiana

If OSU and Michigan must be in the same division, then just have Michigan and PSU trade divisions.

Central/Midwest
Iowa/Minnesota
Michigan State/Michigan
Northwestern/Illinois
Notre Dame/Wisconsin
Penn State/Ohio State
Purdue/Indiana

I think this last alignment is actually pretty good.

North/South:

Permanent Crossovers across from each other:

North/South:
Michigan/Ohio State
Minnesota/Iowa
Northwestern/Illinois
Notre Dame/Purdue
Wisconsin/Penn State
Michigan State/Indiana

Last three could be juggled. I'd be happy with any of Notre Dame, Wisconsin, or Michigan State if I were Penn State. I'd love to trade up from Northwestern if I were Illinois but I'm sure the B1G would stick us with them.

Best thing about this? No damn Nebraska!