(04-21-2021 05:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 02:43 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 01:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m going to tweak an idea JR had earlier just a bit:

ESPN negotiates to send NC St and VT to the SEC (=16)

The ACC adds Texas, Oklahoma, TTU, and Oklahoma St


ACC Pod 1: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Louisville
ACC Pod 2: UVA, UNC, Duke, WF
ACC Pod 3: Clemson, GT, Florida St, Miami
ACC Pod 4: Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St

That’s pretty neat and tidy.

I like it. In the long run I prefer VT stay in the ACC if it doesn't lose any/many more members but if you have to go some where the SEC East is very attractive.

The ACC is neat and tidy but Pod 2 is really soft. I'm not sure they deserve an auto-bid to an ACC playoffs. If the top 2 pod winners face off in the ACCCG instead of a 4 team playoff, that is fine.

And, the SEC breaks down nicely into pods too.

SEC Pod 1: VT, UK, Tenn, Vandy
SEC Pod 2: NC St, SC, UGA, UF
SEC Pod 3: Aub, Ala, Ole Miss, Miss St
SEC Pod 4: LSU, Ark, Mizz, TAMU

Just dreaming...

Things would be so much simpler if the ACC, SEC and ESPN had perfectly aligned interests. Assuming that acquiring Texas, TTU, OU and Ok State was viable, then the case-to-beat alignment would be

Pod 1: Texas, TTU, OU, Ok St
Pod 2: TAMU, LSU, Ark, Mizz
Pod 3: Ole Miss, Miss St, Ala, Aub
Pod 4: Vandy, Tenn, UK, Louisville
Pod 5: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 6: UVA, VT, UNC, Duke
Pod 7: NC St, WF, USC, Clemson
Pod 8: UGA, GT, UF, FSU

Eliminate the wasteful administrative overhead of duplicative conferences. Generate media value by encouraging geographic rivalries while scheduling more marquee brand games. For football...two pods = a division; four pods = a conference

Allow media payouts to vary by pod...thereby no school loses financially, a few schools would gain windfalls. The big financial winners: Texahoma (Pod 1 has major media value), Louisville (joining 3 SEC members in Pod 4), and GT & FSU (merging into a media friendly Pod 8).

I'm curious.
Back in the day it was regarded that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia. I can understand the inclusion of Oklahoma State, but am having a hard time understanding why Texas Tech was chosen over another school( i.e. Kansas, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor)?

(04-22-2021 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 05:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 02:43 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 01:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m going to tweak an idea JR had earlier just a bit:

ESPN negotiates to send NC St and VT to the SEC (=16)

The ACC adds Texas, Oklahoma, TTU, and Oklahoma St


ACC Pod 1: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Louisville
ACC Pod 2: UVA, UNC, Duke, WF
ACC Pod 3: Clemson, GT, Florida St, Miami
ACC Pod 4: Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St

That’s pretty neat and tidy.

I like it. In the long run I prefer VT stay in the ACC if it doesn't lose any/many more members but if you have to go some where the SEC East is very attractive.

The ACC is neat and tidy but Pod 2 is really soft. I'm not sure they deserve an auto-bid to an ACC playoffs. If the top 2 pod winners face off in the ACCCG instead of a 4 team playoff, that is fine.

And, the SEC breaks down nicely into pods too.

SEC Pod 1: VT, UK, Tenn, Vandy
SEC Pod 2: NC St, SC, UGA, UF
SEC Pod 3: Aub, Ala, Ole Miss, Miss St
SEC Pod 4: LSU, Ark, Mizz, TAMU

Just dreaming...

Things would be so much simpler if the ACC, SEC and ESPN had perfectly aligned interests. Assuming that acquiring Texas, TTU, OU and Ok State was viable, then the case-to-beat alignment would be

Pod 1: Texas, TTU, OU, Ok St
Pod 2: TAMU, LSU, Ark, Mizz
Pod 3: Ole Miss, Miss St, Ala, Aub
Pod 4: Vandy, Tenn, UK, Louisville
Pod 5: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 6: UVA, VT, UNC, Duke
Pod 7: NC St, WF, USC, Clemson
Pod 8: UGA, GT, UF, FSU

Eliminate the wasteful administrative overhead of duplicative conferences. Generate media value by encouraging geographic rivalries while scheduling more marquee brand games. For football...two pods = a division; four pods = a conference

Allow media payouts to vary by pod...thereby no school loses financially, a few schools would gain windfalls. The big financial winners: Texahoma (Pod 1 has major media value), Louisville (joining 3 SEC members in Pod 4), and GT & FSU (merging into a media friendly Pod 8).

I'm curious.
Back in the day it was regarded that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia. I can understand the inclusion of Oklahoma State, but am having a hard time understanding why Texas Tech was chosen over another school( i.e. Kansas, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor)?

I imagine it's simply to guarantee Texas another in-state game every year. In fact, one other Texas team might not be enough.

(04-22-2021 07:35 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 05:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 02:43 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 01:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m going to tweak an idea JR had earlier just a bit:

ESPN negotiates to send NC St and VT to the SEC (=16)

The ACC adds Texas, Oklahoma, TTU, and Oklahoma St


ACC Pod 1: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Louisville
ACC Pod 2: UVA, UNC, Duke, WF
ACC Pod 3: Clemson, GT, Florida St, Miami
ACC Pod 4: Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St

That’s pretty neat and tidy.

I like it. In the long run I prefer VT stay in the ACC if it doesn't lose any/many more members but if you have to go some where the SEC East is very attractive.

The ACC is neat and tidy but Pod 2 is really soft. I'm not sure they deserve an auto-bid to an ACC playoffs. If the top 2 pod winners face off in the ACCCG instead of a 4 team playoff, that is fine.

And, the SEC breaks down nicely into pods too.

SEC Pod 1: VT, UK, Tenn, Vandy
SEC Pod 2: NC St, SC, UGA, UF
SEC Pod 3: Aub, Ala, Ole Miss, Miss St
SEC Pod 4: LSU, Ark, Mizz, TAMU

Just dreaming...

Things would be so much simpler if the ACC, SEC and ESPN had perfectly aligned interests. Assuming that acquiring Texas, TTU, OU and Ok State was viable, then the case-to-beat alignment would be

Pod 1: Texas, TTU, OU, Ok St
Pod 2: TAMU, LSU, Ark, Mizz
Pod 3: Ole Miss, Miss St, Ala, Aub
Pod 4: Vandy, Tenn, UK, Louisville
Pod 5: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 6: UVA, VT, UNC, Duke
Pod 7: NC St, WF, USC, Clemson
Pod 8: UGA, GT, UF, FSU

Eliminate the wasteful administrative overhead of duplicative conferences. Generate media value by encouraging geographic rivalries while scheduling more marquee brand games. For football...two pods = a division; four pods = a conference

Allow media payouts to vary by pod...thereby no school loses financially, a few schools would gain windfalls. The big financial winners: Texahoma (Pod 1 has major media value), Louisville (joining 3 SEC members in Pod 4), and GT & FSU (merging into a media friendly Pod 8).

I'm curious.
Back in the day it was regarded that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia. I can understand the inclusion of Oklahoma State, but am having a hard time understanding why Texas Tech was chosen over another school( i.e. Kansas, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor)?

I imagine it's simply to guarantee Texas another in-state game every year. In fact, one other Texas team might not be enough.

Maybe Mark, but Texas has a much longer history with both Baylor and TCU that Texas Tech, and both are in more convenient locations.

(04-22-2021 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 05:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 02:43 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 01:49 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m going to tweak an idea JR had earlier just a bit:

ESPN negotiates to send NC St and VT to the SEC (=16)

The ACC adds Texas, Oklahoma, TTU, and Oklahoma St


ACC Pod 1: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Louisville
ACC Pod 2: UVA, UNC, Duke, WF
ACC Pod 3: Clemson, GT, Florida St, Miami
ACC Pod 4: Texas, TTU, Oklahoma, OK St

That’s pretty neat and tidy.

I like it. In the long run I prefer VT stay in the ACC if it doesn't lose any/many more members but if you have to go some where the SEC East is very attractive.

The ACC is neat and tidy but Pod 2 is really soft. I'm not sure they deserve an auto-bid to an ACC playoffs. If the top 2 pod winners face off in the ACCCG instead of a 4 team playoff, that is fine.

And, the SEC breaks down nicely into pods too.

SEC Pod 1: VT, UK, Tenn, Vandy
SEC Pod 2: NC St, SC, UGA, UF
SEC Pod 3: Aub, Ala, Ole Miss, Miss St
SEC Pod 4: LSU, Ark, Mizz, TAMU

Just dreaming...

Things would be so much simpler if the ACC, SEC and ESPN had perfectly aligned interests. Assuming that acquiring Texas, TTU, OU and Ok State was viable, then the case-to-beat alignment would be

Pod 1: Texas, TTU, OU, Ok St
Pod 2: TAMU, LSU, Ark, Mizz
Pod 3: Ole Miss, Miss St, Ala, Aub
Pod 4: Vandy, Tenn, UK, Louisville
Pod 5: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 6: UVA, VT, UNC, Duke
Pod 7: NC St, WF, USC, Clemson
Pod 8: UGA, GT, UF, FSU

Eliminate the wasteful administrative overhead of duplicative conferences. Generate media value by encouraging geographic rivalries while scheduling more marquee brand games. For football...two pods = a division; four pods = a conference

Allow media payouts to vary by pod...thereby no school loses financially, a few schools would gain windfalls. The big financial winners: Texahoma (Pod 1 has major media value), Louisville (joining 3 SEC members in Pod 4), and GT & FSU (merging into a media friendly Pod 8).

I'm curious.
Back in the day it was regarded that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia. I can understand the inclusion of Oklahoma State, but am having a hard time understanding why Texas Tech was chosen over another school( i.e. Kansas, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor)?

IMO...value fluctuates over time and value is partly judged in the eye-of-the-beholder. Depending on the circumstances, the preference for individual schools (Baylor, Kansas, TCU, TTU and WVU) is debatable. In a static world with ACC/SEC/ESPN as the decision-makers, Kansas would most likely be preferable...but there is not much difference in the value of each of these five athletic departments.

Value is differentiated (generated?) at the top-end of the scale. UT-Austin is a massive brand in college athletics...more valuable than any of the other schools in the theoretical 32 team union. Every other team will benefit financially from having Texas in the union; and having Texas’ athletics thriving helps everyone else. It’s not that Texas Tech is the most valued athletic property (as compared to Kansas, Baylor, TCU, WVU), but TTU creates synergies with UT Austin. TTU has a larger enrollment than other Texas schools, a public school with a focus on research (like UT Austin), in a location that expands the footprint and culture.

(04-22-2021 07:44 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 07:35 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 04:45 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 05:06 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-21-2021 02:43 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I like it. In the long run I prefer VT stay in the ACC if it doesn't lose any/many more members but if you have to go some where the SEC East is very attractive.

The ACC is neat and tidy but Pod 2 is really soft. I'm not sure they deserve an auto-bid to an ACC playoffs. If the top 2 pod winners face off in the ACCCG instead of a 4 team playoff, that is fine.

And, the SEC breaks down nicely into pods too.

SEC Pod 1: VT, UK, Tenn, Vandy
SEC Pod 2: NC St, SC, UGA, UF
SEC Pod 3: Aub, Ala, Ole Miss, Miss St
SEC Pod 4: LSU, Ark, Mizz, TAMU

Just dreaming...

Things would be so much simpler if the ACC, SEC and ESPN had perfectly aligned interests. Assuming that acquiring Texas, TTU, OU and Ok State was viable, then the case-to-beat alignment would be

Pod 1: Texas, TTU, OU, Ok St
Pod 2: TAMU, LSU, Ark, Mizz
Pod 3: Ole Miss, Miss St, Ala, Aub
Pod 4: Vandy, Tenn, UK, Louisville
Pod 5: Pitt, Cuse, BC, Miami
Pod 6: UVA, VT, UNC, Duke
Pod 7: NC St, WF, USC, Clemson
Pod 8: UGA, GT, UF, FSU

Eliminate the wasteful administrative overhead of duplicative conferences. Generate media value by encouraging geographic rivalries while scheduling more marquee brand games. For football...two pods = a division; four pods = a conference

Allow media payouts to vary by pod...thereby no school loses financially, a few schools would gain windfalls. The big financial winners: Texahoma (Pod 1 has major media value), Louisville (joining 3 SEC members in Pod 4), and GT & FSU (merging into a media friendly Pod 8).

I'm curious.
Back in the day it was regarded that the value in the Big 12 was in 4 schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and West Virginia. I can understand the inclusion of Oklahoma State, but am having a hard time understanding why Texas Tech was chosen over another school( i.e. Kansas, West Virginia, TCU, Baylor)?

I imagine it's simply to guarantee Texas another in-state game every year. In fact, one other Texas team might not be enough.

Maybe Mark, but Texas has a much longer history with both Baylor and TCU that Texas Tech, and both are in more convenient locations.

I'm with you on that last part. Texas Tech is in the middle onf NOWHERE.

How about if, instead of pods, have four 8 team divisions playing a full round robin? Then, have an 8 team Conference Championship Tournament (CCT) with the four division champions and the four highest ranked non-champions.

The B1G and PAC could stage their own tournament, with their four division champs, and the four highest ranked non-champs including Notre Dame in that pool, with the stipulation that the Irish have to play at least four games against those two conferences (including USC and Stanford who they already play).

The two Conference Championship Games would be played at The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl on New Year's and the winners square off in a national championship game a week or so later in prime time.

The four divisions:

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, Duke, and Wake

Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, NC State, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia


Protected annual games could be played OOC: Tennessee-Vandy, Florida State-Miami, Duke-UNC, Wake-UNC, and Wake-NC State

(04-22-2021 10:44 AM)ken d Wrote:  How about if, instead of pods, have four 8 team divisions playing a full round robin? Then, have an 8 team Conference Championship Tournament (CCT) with the four division champions and the four highest ranked non-champions.

The B1G and PAC could stage their own tournament, with their four division champs, and the four highest ranked non-champs including Notre Dame in that pool, with the stipulation that the Irish have to play at least four games against those two conferences (including USC and Stanford who they already play).

The two Conference Championship Games would be played at The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl on New Year's and the winners square off in a national championship game a week or so later in prime time.

The four divisions:

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, Duke, and Wake

Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, NC State, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia


Protected annual games could be played OOC: Tennessee-Vandy, Florida State-Miami, Duke-UNC, Wake-UNC, and Wake-NC State

What would motivate the SEC to want to participate in this?

The obsession with 16 team conferences with two 8 team divisions is understandable because it's easy for people to add that low, but that's just not going to happen because you can't schedule two divisions of 8 and keep the majority happy. That's why three divisions of 5 or 6 is the only viable formula for successful expansion without a lot of dissention.

(04-22-2021 10:44 AM)ken d Wrote:  How about if, instead of pods, have four 8 team divisions playing a full round robin? Then, have an 8 team Conference Championship Tournament (CCT) with the four division champions and the four highest ranked non-champions.

The B1G and PAC could stage their own tournament, with their four division champs, and the four highest ranked non-champs including Notre Dame in that pool, with the stipulation that the Irish have to play at least four games against those two conferences (including USC and Stanford who they already play).

The two Conference Championship Games would be played at The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl on New Year's and the winners square off in a national championship game a week or so later in prime time.

The four divisions:

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, Duke, and Wake

Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, NC State, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia


Protected annual games could be played OOC: Tennessee-Vandy, Florida State-Miami, Duke-UNC, Wake-UNC, and Wake-NC State

That is a good idea to generate money...making the conference large enough to schedule a fair, meaningful and expanded playoff. Additional media value would be created if schools are willing to play more meaningful out-of-division games. Division winners and runner-ups would be determined by the 7 game division schedule. Early season cross-division games (such as Georgia-Oklahoma, Alabama-Clemson, Miami-Texas, LSU-FSU, etc.) could proliferate without risking elimination due to an early season out-of-division loss.

University presidents are probably against additional games for players...so the start of the playoffs would be during the final regular season game. Traditional rivalry week opponents would be played one week earlier. Divisional winners (#1 seeds) would host the traveling runner-up (#2 seed) from another division...basically the conference quarterfinal round. Teams not making the playoffs would play an equally ranked team from another division during the final regular season game. The neutral site CCG games then convert to conference semifinals round. The January 1 Bowl becomes the new expanded CCG. Allowing the BIG & PAC to arrange their own CFP qualifier in the Rose Bowl.

If all 32 teams are in the same conference, then scheduling discrepancies can be addressed. Teams are now collaborating to create greater value. Some major bowls can still be events when the better Southern teams play against the Union-Pacific.

It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

(04-22-2021 01:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 10:44 AM)ken d Wrote:  How about if, instead of pods, have four 8 team divisions playing a full round robin? Then, have an 8 team Conference Championship Tournament (CCT) with the four division champions and the four highest ranked non-champions.

The B1G and PAC could stage their own tournament, with their four division champs, and the four highest ranked non-champs including Notre Dame in that pool, with the stipulation that the Irish have to play at least four games against those two conferences (including USC and Stanford who they already play).

The two Conference Championship Games would be played at The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl on New Year's and the winners square off in a national championship game a week or so later in prime time.

The four divisions:

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, Duke, and Wake

Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, NC State, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia


Protected annual games could be played OOC: Tennessee-Vandy, Florida State-Miami, Duke-UNC, Wake-UNC, and Wake-NC State

That is a good idea to generate money...making the conference large enough to schedule a fair, meaningful and expanded playoff. Additional media value would be created if schools are willing to play more meaningful out-of-division games. Division winners and runner-ups would be determined by the 7 game division schedule. Early season cross-division games (such as Georgia-Oklahoma, Alabama-Clemson, Miami-Texas, LSU-FSU, etc.) could proliferate without risking elimination due to an early season out-of-division loss.

University presidents are probably against additional games for players...so the start of the playoffs would be during the final regular season game. Traditional rivalry week opponents would be played one week earlier. Divisional winners (#1 seeds) would host the traveling runner-up (#2 seed) from another division...basically the conference quarterfinal round. Teams not making the playoffs would play an equally ranked team from another division during the final regular season game. The neutral site CCG games then convert to conference semifinals round. The January 1 Bowl becomes the new expanded CCG. Allowing the BIG & PAC to arrange their own CFP qualifier in the Rose Bowl.

If all 32 teams are in the same conference, then scheduling discrepancies can be addressed. Teams are now collaborating to create greater value. Some major bowls can still be events when the better Southern teams play against the Union-Pacific.

Prior to the realignment in 2010-2 I suggested a Great South or Southern vs a Union -Pacific in some posts. Back then it was possible that a reasonable compensation could be found that would incentivize all parties. The disparity is so great now that I'm not sure that it's possible to ameliorate media payouts to achieve anything like this.

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

I don't want ND football to join any conference, but I most especially don't want it to join the Big Ten, even with an instant $40 million a year increased paycheck.

The Big Ten would dump ND into that wasteland tundra known as the Big Ten West and try to "Nebraska" them.

ND people are convinced that the Big Ten only wants it to join so that the Big Ten can control and neutralize it.

There is about 110 years of hard feelings and suspicion between ND and the Big Ten.

(04-22-2021 08:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

I don't want ND football to join any conference, but I most especially don't want it to join the Big Ten, even with an instant $40 million a year increased paycheck.

The Big Ten would dump ND into that wasteland tundra known as the Big Ten West and try to "Nebraska" them.

ND people are convinced that the Big Ten only wants it to join so that the Big Ten can control and neutralize it.

There is about 110 years of hard feelings and suspicion between ND and the Big Ten.

ND could make it a condition of joining to be in the East and play tOSU, Mich, Mich St. and PSU every year. Although, I can see how that wouldn't be as attractive as independence.

(04-22-2021 10:10 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 08:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

I don't want ND football to join any conference, but I most especially don't want it to join the Big Ten, even with an instant $40 million a year increased paycheck.

The Big Ten would dump ND into that wasteland tundra known as the Big Ten West and try to "Nebraska" them.

ND people are convinced that the Big Ten only wants it to join so that the Big Ten can control and neutralize it.

There is about 110 years of hard feelings and suspicion between ND and the Big Ten.

ND could make it a condition of joining to be in the East and play tOSU, Mich, Mich St. and PSU every year. Although, I can see how that wouldn't be as attractive as independence.

Much, much better from ND's point of view than playing teams like Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Minnesota and Nebraska every year.

Of all the places where ND wants to schedule teams to play and places to recruit, the Upper Midwest is not one of them.

It already has six or seven home games in the Midwest built right in, without having additional annual games there and in the Upper Midwest.

(04-22-2021 08:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

I don't want ND football to join any conference, but I most especially don't want it to join the Big Ten, even with an instant $40 million a year increased paycheck.

The Big Ten would dump ND into that wasteland tundra known as the Big Ten West and try to "Nebraska" them.

ND people are convinced that the Big Ten only wants it to join so that the Big Ten can control and neutralize it.

There is about 110 years of hard feelings and suspicion between ND and the Big Ten.

And yet, when there was a realignment segment on NDNation it seemed that more than 1/2 of all of those grizzly old ND alumni that post there favored joining the B1G instead of the ACC if they had to join a conference.
Even now, a good number of those alumni view the ACC with disdain.

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

If it weren't for ESPN wanting to keep a slice of the NE, the ideal solution would be to cede Boston College, Syracuse and Pitt to the B1G if they would send Nebraska back to the Big 12 (it would give the B1G 16). Or, Keep Nebraska and add West Virginia for 18.

(04-22-2021 07:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 01:55 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 10:44 AM)ken d Wrote:  How about if, instead of pods, have four 8 team divisions playing a full round robin? Then, have an 8 team Conference Championship Tournament (CCT) with the four division champions and the four highest ranked non-champions.

The B1G and PAC could stage their own tournament, with their four division champs, and the four highest ranked non-champs including Notre Dame in that pool, with the stipulation that the Irish have to play at least four games against those two conferences (including USC and Stanford who they already play).

The two Conference Championship Games would be played at The Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowl on New Year's and the winners square off in a national championship game a week or so later in prime time.

The four divisions:

Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, Duke, and Wake

Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, NC State, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia


Protected annual games could be played OOC: Tennessee-Vandy, Florida State-Miami, Duke-UNC, Wake-UNC, and Wake-NC State

That is a good idea to generate money...making the conference large enough to schedule a fair, meaningful and expanded playoff. Additional media value would be created if schools are willing to play more meaningful out-of-division games. Division winners and runner-ups would be determined by the 7 game division schedule. Early season cross-division games (such as Georgia-Oklahoma, Alabama-Clemson, Miami-Texas, LSU-FSU, etc.) could proliferate without risking elimination due to an early season out-of-division loss.

University presidents are probably against additional games for players...so the start of the playoffs would be during the final regular season game. Traditional rivalry week opponents would be played one week earlier. Divisional winners (#1 seeds) would host the traveling runner-up (#2 seed) from another division...basically the conference quarterfinal round. Teams not making the playoffs would play an equally ranked team from another division during the final regular season game. The neutral site CCG games then convert to conference semifinals round. The January 1 Bowl becomes the new expanded CCG. Allowing the BIG & PAC to arrange their own CFP qualifier in the Rose Bowl.

If all 32 teams are in the same conference, then scheduling discrepancies can be addressed. Teams are now collaborating to create greater value. Some major bowls can still be events when the better Southern teams play against the Union-Pacific.

Prior to the realignment in 2010-2 I suggested a Great South or Southern vs a Union -Pacific in some posts. Back then it was possible that a reasonable compensation could be found that would incentivize all parties. The disparity is so great now that I'm not sure that it's possible to ameliorate media payouts to achieve anything like this.

Greedy capitalist, LOL. Since we’re down this rabbit hole, might as well go further...

Make the deal more appealing to ESPN by mitigating the ACC’s Achilles heel while leveraging the Notre Dame relationship. Tobacco Road doesn’t invest sufficiently in football and four programs in North Carolina results in too much dead weight when selling media content. Need to convince one school to move to a partial member (Duke?) for football. This new massive 32 team conference also makes the CFP playoffs a closed shop for teams outside the power conferences. Offer ND access to the CFP via an 8 game annual minimum commitment...seven divisional games, plus the start of the playoffs (last game of the season). ND could even switch divisions every few years to further diversify its scheduling. The proposed divisions...

SW: Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and Kansas

SC: Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Mississippi State, Louisville, Ole Miss, Tennessee and Kentucky

SE: Clemson, Georgia, Florida St, Florida, South Carolina, Ga Tech, NC State, and Wake

East: Notre Dame, Virginia Tech, Miami, UNC, Pitt, Boston College, Syracuse and Virginia (and Duke as a partial w/o football)

Every few years ND could jump to the SW division in exchange for Vandy. They would get marquee, unique event games in Texas (passionate football and Catholic enclave). ND still has 4 free games on its schedule for its traditional annual match-ups (USC, Navy, Stanford) and another home/nearby rival (G5 @ home or BIG H&A).

This is now ESPN’s dream set-up.

(04-23-2021 04:46 AM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 08:39 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-22-2021 06:55 PM)schmolik Wrote:  It seems like "Big Ten" is a swear word at this board but if the gap between the SEC and the Big Ten and everyone else widens, why not the ACC and Big Ten merge to narrow the gap?

I see all these posts about the ACC and SEC, ACC and Big 12 but no one other than me mentions about the ACC and Big Ten as if the Big Ten has no right to Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, Georgia Tech, etc despite the fact that there were rumors about each of these schools to the Big Ten before the GOR was signed. I think people on this board would rather their schools join the AAC and C-USA than join the Big Ten.

I don't want ND football to join any conference, but I most especially don't want it to join the Big Ten, even with an instant $40 million a year increased paycheck.

The Big Ten would dump ND into that wasteland tundra known as the Big Ten West and try to "Nebraska" them.

ND people are convinced that the Big Ten only wants it to join so that the Big Ten can control and neutralize it.

There is about 110 years of hard feelings and suspicion between ND and the Big Ten.

And yet, when there was a realignment segment on NDNation it seemed that more than 1/2 of all of those grizzly old ND alumni that post there favored joining the B1G instead of the ACC if they had to join a conference.
Even now, a good number of those alumni view the ACC with disdain.

Maybe that's because they were old and grizzly?