Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
Hokie Mark Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,143
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 664
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Charlotte, NC
Post: #21
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-28-2018 03:14 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 11:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Maryland's internal problems are probably older than most on this board. Losing graduate programs to Baltimore in 1970 hurt their future athletic donation stream. The committed the equivalent of suicide when Len Bias died and gutted the athletic department firing Lefty and replacing him with Bob Wade and then refusing to support Bobby Ross so he left for GT. At the same time the athletic department was committed by the administration of the school to fully funding Title IX despite the fact that MD did not have a graduate profile to match UVa's or UNC's needed to bankroll such spending. There is anecdotal evidence that the losses to Duke in basketball and to West Va in football were used by Kirwan to sell his desire to move MD to the Big 10. Some say MD's athletic program was purposely starved. Changing tastes and more competition in the market also hurt MD. IIRC it has only been since MD joined the Big 10 that the school administration began sending some money back to the athletic programs. MD's problems run hand in hand with Brit Kirwan. Learn more about him and you will understand Maryland's problems much better.


03-lmfao
That time period is right in my wheelhouse LP4. Graduated from Carolina in 1971.
03-old

Dog, I guess I need to be more respectful... didn't realize you guys were so old!
12-28-2018 03:34 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,953
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 174
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #22
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

SF,

I agree with your UMD assessment and I can see the PSU athletic department flirting with changing conferences allegiances. But the academic side worked too hard to get Penn St into the B10 back in the 80's for the ACC move to have serious viability IMO.
12-28-2018 11:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrazyPaco Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,329
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 110
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-28-2018 11:23 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

SF,

I agree with your UMD assessment and I can see the PSU athletic department flirting with changing conferences allegiances. But the academic side worked too hard to get Penn St into the B10 back in the 80's for the ACC move to have serious viability IMO.

What academic side? Seriously.
12-28-2018 11:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 885
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 61
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-28-2018 11:40 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 11:23 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

SF,

I agree with your UMD assessment and I can see the PSU athletic department flirting with changing conferences allegiances. But the academic side worked too hard to get Penn St into the B10 back in the 80's for the ACC move to have serious viability IMO.

What academic side? Seriously.

There is very little academic quality difference between the ACC and the B10. The entire mythos of AAU is lost on most folks because they don't realize it's just a club used for magnifying influence in DC. If uniform standards were applied in addition to Syracuse and Nebraska being forced out, Kansas, Mizzou, Oregon and a few others would be on the curb. Keeping the size of the club at 62 is the main reason schools like VT, NCSU, Cincy, etc., are not in the club. Someone has to get tossed out for someone new to get in.

The real difference is between the Cow College STEMS and the small elite privates. The academics at WF, BC, ND, and Miami are all on a par or better from a quality standpoint with the B10. AAU is mostly a legacy of WW II and the explosion of defense related research, but it evolves and changes like everything else.

An old battle axe from Happy Valley once told me the academic pressure on PSU and the envy came from their proximity to Penn, Princeton, and Pitt. The middle of PA is nearly the same as Alabama but with more rugged terrain and some coal. She suffered the usual cow college digs when she would come to town in Philly or Boston (do you wear shoes now?, how are the cows?, etc.)


There is much less Ivy League envy in the Mid-West or at least that's what I've been led to believe.

There are a lot of misconceptions about the AAU but if you look at when they formed and the geographic distribution it should become clearer.

In 1900 the AAU was founded by Cal, Michigan, Cornell, Harvard, Yale, Penn, Chicago, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia, John's Hopkins, Wisconsin, Clark, and Catholic. Clark and Catholic has since dropped out. When it was formed, AAU was not about lobbying Congress for research money. The geographic distribution of the schools should tell you a great deal.

In 1904 UVa is added.

In 1907/08 they expanded and added Mizzou, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, and Nebraska. Nebraska since kicked out.

In 1916/17 they added Northwestern and Ohio State.

In 22/23 they add Washington of St. Louis and UNC.

In 1926 McGill and Toronto were added.

In 1929 Texas was added - this is the first "deep south" addition.

In the rest of the 1930's Cal Tech, Duke, and Brown are added.

Rochester is added in 1941 and that's the last addition until well after World War II.

After WWII this group well knows the amount and value of federal funding for research and they add to their membership in ways to diversify and to redefine themselves relative to federally funded research. This is why Clark and American exited. Nebraska and Syracuse were pushed out to open a slot for another southern member involved in more research - GT.

Anyway, when the Big 10 tosses out the term AAU in regards to athletic expansion, they toss if for socio-cultural reasons not academic reasons. They are making a statement about where they and their alums, donors, and administration feel comfortable and with whom.
(This post was last modified: 12-29-2018 09:53 AM by Statefan.)
12-29-2018 09:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ArQ Online
Special Teams
*

Posts: 945
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 32
I Root For: Pitt/Louisville
Location: Most beautiful place
Post: #25
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

Do you write spy novels?
12-29-2018 09:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,953
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 174
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #26
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-29-2018 09:16 AM)Statefan Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 11:40 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 11:23 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

SF,

I agree with your UMD assessment and I can see the PSU athletic department flirting with changing conferences allegiances. But the academic side worked too hard to get Penn St into the B10 back in the 80's for the ACC move to have serious viability IMO.

What academic side? Seriously.

There is very little academic quality difference between the ACC and the B10. The entire mythos of AAU is lost on most folks because they don't realize it's just a club used for magnifying influence in DC. If uniform standards were applied in addition to Syracuse and Nebraska being forced out, Kansas, Mizzou, Oregon and a few others would be on the curb. Keeping the size of the club at 62 is the main reason schools like VT, NCSU, Cincy, etc., are not in the club. Someone has to get tossed out for someone new to get in.

The real difference is between the Cow College STEMS and the small elite privates. The academics at WF, BC, ND, and Miami are all on a par or better from a quality standpoint with the B10. AAU is mostly a legacy of WW II and the explosion of defense related research, but it evolves and changes like everything else.

An old battle axe from Happy Valley once told me the academic pressure on PSU and the envy came from their proximity to Penn, Princeton, and Pitt. The middle of PA is nearly the same as Alabama but with more rugged terrain and some coal. She suffered the usual cow college digs when she would come to town in Philly or Boston (do you wear shoes now?, how are the cows?, etc.)


There is much less Ivy League envy in the Mid-West or at least that's what I've been led to believe.

There are a lot of misconceptions about the AAU but if you look at when they formed and the geographic distribution it should become clearer.

In 1900 the AAU was founded by Cal, Michigan, Cornell, Harvard, Yale, Penn, Chicago, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia, John's Hopkins, Wisconsin, Clark, and Catholic. Clark and Catholic has since dropped out. When it was formed, AAU was not about lobbying Congress for research money. The geographic distribution of the schools should tell you a great deal.

In 1904 UVa is added.

In 1907/08 they expanded and added Mizzou, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, and Nebraska. Nebraska since kicked out.

In 1916/17 they added Northwestern and Ohio State.

In 22/23 they add Washington of St. Louis and UNC.

In 1926 McGill and Toronto were added.

In 1929 Texas was added - this is the first "deep south" addition.

In the rest of the 1930's Cal Tech, Duke, and Brown are added.

Rochester is added in 1941 and that's the last addition until well after World War II.

After WWII this group well knows the amount and value of federal funding for research and they add to their membership in ways to diversify and to redefine themselves relative to federally funded research. This is why Clark and American exited. Nebraska and Syracuse were pushed out to open a slot for another southern member involved in more research - GT.

Anyway, when the Big 10 tosses out the term AAU in regards to athletic expansion, they toss if for socio-cultural reasons not academic reasons. They are making a statement about where they and their alums, donors, and administration feel comfortable and with whom.

I concede that the myth is is overhyped, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t people in administrative positions that don’t believe that said myth doesn’t have any value.
12-29-2018 10:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 885
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 61
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
Van - no doubt people want into the "club". My only point relative to PSU was that they were already in AAU from 1958 and in no danger of losing that status and I don't know of anything the faculty at PSU had to do to get Penn State into the Big 10 as it was football decision made by the ptb in Ann Arbor, Madison, Iowa City, and Columbus. You may know something I don't. The real value is being in the "club" for future hiring purposes.

https://nsjonline.com/article/2018/09/20...n-raleigh/

Americans like to tell the tale that we don't ascribe to social class - but we do.
12-29-2018 10:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,624
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1891
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-29-2018 10:22 AM)Statefan Wrote:  Van - no doubt people want into the "club". My only point relative to PSU was that they were already in AAU from 1958 and in no danger of losing that status and I don't know of anything the faculty at PSU had to do to get Penn State into the Big 10 as it was football decision made by the ptb in Ann Arbor, Madison, Iowa City, and Columbus. You may know something I don't. The real value is being in the "club" for future hiring purposes.

https://nsjonline.com/article/2018/09/20...n-raleigh/

Americans like to tell the tale that we don't ascribe to social class - but we do.

Especially in corporate America, political parties, and the military command structure. University presidents love the first two and understand the importance of the third.
12-30-2018 09:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,624
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1891
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
If you want Texas it's best to get them all in. A division of 5 would be the way to go.

Texas, 2 or 3 other Texas schools, rounded out with 1 or 2 others from the Big 12 would be enough.

That way you can move to 4 divisions of 5 all geographically based and bring in larger market penetration for the ACCN.
12-30-2018 09:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CrazyPaco Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,329
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 110
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-29-2018 09:16 AM)Statefan Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 11:40 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 11:23 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 10:57 AM)Statefan Wrote:  The B10 was under some pressure to prevent PSU from moving. The ACC was probably closer to having PSU move than we may know until some folks die at WF. It was not until very, very late in the process that the conference found out that MD was playing a double game with intent to leave the conference. Remember, MD not only brings its market footprint, it brings the info needed to for the B10 to keep PSU in place and to squelch any conversation between league emissaries and NW and or Purdue.


Maryland "paid for itself" by solidifying Penn State.

SF,

I agree with your UMD assessment and I can see the PSU athletic department flirting with changing conferences allegiances. But the academic side worked too hard to get Penn St into the B10 back in the 80's for the ACC move to have serious viability IMO.

What academic side? Seriously.

There is very little academic quality difference between the ACC and the B10. The entire mythos of AAU is lost on most folks because they don't realize it's just a club used for magnifying influence in DC. If uniform standards were applied in addition to Syracuse and Nebraska being forced out, Kansas, Mizzou, Oregon and a few others would be on the curb. Keeping the size of the club at 62 is the main reason schools like VT, NCSU, Cincy, etc., are not in the club. Someone has to get tossed out for someone new to get in.

The real difference is between the Cow College STEMS and the small elite privates. The academics at WF, BC, ND, and Miami are all on a par or better from a quality standpoint with the B10. AAU is mostly a legacy of WW II and the explosion of defense related research, but it evolves and changes like everything else.

An old battle axe from Happy Valley once told me the academic pressure on PSU and the envy came from their proximity to Penn, Princeton, and Pitt. The middle of PA is nearly the same as Alabama but with more rugged terrain and some coal. She suffered the usual cow college digs when she would come to town in Philly or Boston (do you wear shoes now?, how are the cows?, etc.)


There is much less Ivy League envy in the Mid-West or at least that's what I've been led to believe.

There are a lot of misconceptions about the AAU but if you look at when they formed and the geographic distribution it should become clearer.

In 1900 the AAU was founded by Cal, Michigan, Cornell, Harvard, Yale, Penn, Chicago, Stanford, Princeton, Columbia, John's Hopkins, Wisconsin, Clark, and Catholic. Clark and Catholic has since dropped out. When it was formed, AAU was not about lobbying Congress for research money. The geographic distribution of the schools should tell you a great deal.

In 1904 UVa is added.

In 1907/08 they expanded and added Mizzou, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, and Nebraska. Nebraska since kicked out.

In 1916/17 they added Northwestern and Ohio State.

In 22/23 they add Washington of St. Louis and UNC.

In 1926 McGill and Toronto were added.

In 1929 Texas was added - this is the first "deep south" addition.

In the rest of the 1930's Cal Tech, Duke, and Brown are added.

Rochester is added in 1941 and that's the last addition until well after World War II.

After WWII this group well knows the amount and value of federal funding for research and they add to their membership in ways to diversify and to redefine themselves relative to federally funded research. This is why Clark and American exited. Nebraska and Syracuse were pushed out to open a slot for another southern member involved in more research - GT.

Anyway, when the Big 10 tosses out the term AAU in regards to athletic expansion, they toss if for socio-cultural reasons not academic reasons. They are making a statement about where they and their alums, donors, and administration feel comfortable and with whom.

Academics, in the sense of the academic quality of the institutions in the Big Ten or of Penn State, had absolutely zero to do with Penn State's move to the Big Ten. And there was absolutely no academic vs athletic side at Penn State for the bulk of Joe Paterno's tenure. There was only Paterno's side. And the university still struggles with the remnants of that.

The AAU is irrelevant to discussions of college athletics, and really, much of academia. Mostly, if functions as a data sharing consortium among similarly construed research-intensive universities, that yes, coordinates lobbying on matters relevant to its membership, particularly when related to federal R&D allocations. However, it is an athletic bloggers' red herring.
(This post was last modified: 12-30-2018 10:47 PM by CrazyPaco.)
12-30-2018 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OrangeDude Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 611
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely,
(12-30-2018 09:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you want Texas it's best to get them all in. A division of 5 would be the way to go.

Texas, 2 or 3 other Texas schools, rounded out with 1 or 2 others from the Big 12 would be enough.

That way you can move to 4 divisions of 5 all geographically based and bring in larger market penetration for the ACCN.

Well, if the league goes to 20 with 4 divisions of 5 programs each:

Southwest - Texas, OU, Okla St, TCU, L'Ville
Southeast - FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Wake
Mid-Atlantic - UNC, VT, NCST, UVA, Duke
Northeast - PSU, Pitt, SU, BC, MD

Might as well think big.

Obviously there is no chance this comes about at all. But might as well bring the New Year in on the right note.

Cheers,
Neil
12-31-2018 12:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 885
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 61
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 12:18 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  
(12-30-2018 09:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you want Texas it's best to get them all in. A division of 5 would be the way to go.

Texas, 2 or 3 other Texas schools, rounded out with 1 or 2 others from the Big 12 would be enough.

That way you can move to 4 divisions of 5 all geographically based and bring in larger market penetration for the ACCN.

Well, if the league goes to 20 with 4 divisions of 5 programs each:

Southwest - Texas, OU, Okla St, TCU, L'Ville
Southeast - FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Wake
Mid-Atlantic - UNC, VT, NCST, UVA, Duke
Northeast - PSU, Pitt, SU, BC, MD

Might as well think big.

Obviously there is no chance this comes about at all. But might as well bring the New Year in on the right note.

Cheers,
Neil

Here's Big - The New Southern Conference:

Northeast Division - ND, PSU, Pitt, WVa, Syracuse, BC
Atlantic Division - VT, UVa, UNC, NCSU, Duke, WF
Southeast Division - GT, UGa, Clemson, SC, Florida, FSU
Old South Division - Miami, Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, Ole Miss, MSU
Ozark Division - UK, Louisville, Vandy, Mizzou, Kansas, Arkansas
Gulf Division - OU, OSU, TT, TAMU, Texas, LSU

Each division mints a division champion who gets a bye in the playoff. Four at large teams are selected from the remaining 30 based on some sort of ranking, etc. The at larges play first and meet 1 and 2. 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5.

Two games in week one, four games in week two, two games in week three, one game in week 4. Week one could be in Charlotte and Nashville. Week two in Orlando, Tampa, Houston, and Atlanta. Week three in Miami and New Orleans. Week four could be on the Moon.

The only programs of any television significance on the outside looking in would be Ohio State, Michigan, and USC.

Based on this years results you get division winners Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Kentucky, and NC State. Wild Cards are from the pool of Georgia, Penn State, Syracuse, Florida, Texas and LSU.

Must see TV. 04-cheers

Now the mouse would likely not want to include WF, BC, Oklahoma State, Vandy, West Va, Pitt, and TT, but all 7 have friends - friends likely to be willing to take a very light hair cut to keep them around.
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2018 11:41 AM by Statefan.)
12-31-2018 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OrangeDude Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 611
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 82
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 11:35 AM)Statefan Wrote:  
(12-31-2018 12:18 AM)OrangeDude Wrote:  
(12-30-2018 09:51 PM)JRsec Wrote:  If you want Texas it's best to get them all in. A division of 5 would be the way to go.

Texas, 2 or 3 other Texas schools, rounded out with 1 or 2 others from the Big 12 would be enough.

That way you can move to 4 divisions of 5 all geographically based and bring in larger market penetration for the ACCN.

Well, if the league goes to 20 with 4 divisions of 5 programs each:

Southwest - Texas, OU, Okla St, TCU, L'Ville
Southeast - FSU, Miami, GT, Clemson, Wake
Mid-Atlantic - UNC, VT, NCST, UVA, Duke
Northeast - PSU, Pitt, SU, BC, MD

Might as well think big.

Obviously there is no chance this comes about at all. But might as well bring the New Year in on the right note.

Cheers,
Neil

Here's Big - The New Southern Conference:

Northeast Division - ND, PSU, Pitt, WVa, Syracuse, BC
Atlantic Division - VT, UVa, UNC, NCSU, Duke, WF
Southeast Division - GT, UGa, Clemson, SC, Florida, FSU
Old South Division - Miami, Auburn, Alabama, Tennessee, Ole Miss, MSU
Ozark Division - UK, Louisville, Vandy, Mizzou, Kansas, Arkansas
Gulf Division - OU, OSU, TT, TAMU, Texas, LSU

Each division mints a division champion who gets a bye in the playoff. Four at large teams are selected from the remaining 30 based on some sort of ranking, etc. The at larges play first and meet 1 and 2. 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5.

Two games in week one, four games in week two, two games in week three, one game in week 4. Week one could be in Charlotte and Nashville. Week two in Orlando, Tampa, Houston, and Atlanta. Week three in Miami and New Orleans. Week four could be on the Moon.

The only programs of any television significance on the outside looking in would be Ohio State, Michigan, and USC.

Based on this years results you get division winners Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Kentucky, and NC State. Wild Cards are from the pool of Georgia, Penn State, Syracuse, Florida, Texas and LSU.

Must see TV. 04-cheers

Now the mouse would likely not want to include WF, BC, Oklahoma State, Vandy, West Va, Pitt, and TT, but all 7 have friends - friends likely to be willing to take a very light hair cut to keep them around.

And I thought I was thinking BIG. 04-bow

Cheers,
Neil
12-31-2018 12:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,245
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #34
Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
Why not a partial merger with the PAC?

ACC
West: USC, Stanford, Cal, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, ND

Central: Louisville, VT, Miami, NC State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC

South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC, Duke, Virginia, WF

The rest of the PAC merges with the B12 & we have our P4 with champs only CFP.

B12
West: Arizona, Arizona St, Washington State, Oregon State

North: Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech, Iowa State

South: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, WV, TCU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-31-2018 02:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Statefan Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 885
Joined: May 2018
Reputation: 61
I Root For: .
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 02:28 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why not a partial merger with the PAC?

ACC
West: USC, Stanford, Cal, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, ND

Central: Louisville, VT, Miami, NC State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC

South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC, Duke, Virginia, WF

The rest of the PAC merges with the B12 & we have our P4 with champs only CFP.

B12
West: Arizona, Arizona St, Washington State, Oregon State

North: Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech, Iowa State

South: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, WV, TCU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Pacific 12's problems are cultural. College football is waning in popularity on the west coast. A number of socio-economic reasons are to blame and now USC and UCLA have to compete against the Rams and the Chargers. Remember, these are the same people who have become so weird they fail to vaccinate their children - you think they will let them play football? Trump and his anti-Kapenick kneeling tirade shines a light into this social fissure. UVa, Duke, and UNC have a problem with this now.

The distance is a problem.

Finally no one in California is really going to give a **** about college sports in NC, Va, etc.

JR can probably speak to some of this as well. If you are really well-traveled and I mean not just by airplane but by car or RV, the deep cultural taste differences in the US are easier to read. And it is a taste, mannerism, value thing such that when all three align one way they really stand out.
12-31-2018 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,624
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1891
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 02:57 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(12-31-2018 02:28 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why not a partial merger with the PAC?

ACC
West: USC, Stanford, Cal, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, ND

Central: Louisville, VT, Miami, NC State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC

South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC, Duke, Virginia, WF

The rest of the PAC merges with the B12 & we have our P4 with champs only CFP.

B12
West: Arizona, Arizona St, Washington State, Oregon State

North: Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech, Iowa State

South: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, WV, TCU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Pacific 12's problems are cultural. College football is waning in popularity on the west coast. A number of socio-economic reasons are to blame and now USC and UCLA have to compete against the Rams and the Chargers. Remember, these are the same people who have become so weird they fail to vaccinate their children - you think they will let them play football? Trump and his anti-Kapenick kneeling tirade shines a light into this social fissure. UVa, Duke, and UNC have a problem with this now.

The distance is a problem.

Finally no one in California is really going to give a **** about college sports in NC, Va, etc.

JR can probably speak to some of this as well. If you are really well-traveled and I mean not just by airplane but by car or RV, the deep cultural taste differences in the US are easier to read. And it is a taste, mannerism, value thing such that when all three align one way they really stand out.

The ACC and SEC just need to absorb 7 of the Big 12 schools and bundle the SEC/ACC networks. Why? The west coast isn't interested in us. Locking in all of the Texas P5 schools between us along with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State gives each of our conferences multiple games in a rabid football region that reach 31 million between those 6 schools on at least 3 occasions per Saturday in the Fall.

If we wanted to add the two Kansas schools okay. But WVU should be the 7th. 3 for the ACC with N.D. joining in full and 4 for the SEC would give us 36 between us and absolute control over the finest recruiting for football, baseball, basketball, and softball in the nation. Bundling the channels puts us in most of the cable homes, (and in streaming packages) in the most population dense regions of the nation.

Having everything South of Pennsylvania (except Maryland) in the hands of ESPN means we will continue to get the best advertising rates.

Then a closer scheduling alliance between us gives ESPN the in house revenue it needs to remain flush.

What I don't favor is any scenario where the Big 10 gets into Texas via Oklahoma.
12-31-2018 11:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 46,775
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 1364
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #37
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
Lemme just dust off my copypasta:

#TeamMegaconference
Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska

Permanent Rivals:
Duke-GT, TN-VT, FSU-Miami, Clemson-NCST, UNC-SC, UofL-UK, Auburn-Alabama, Vandy-WF, Texas-OU, TAMU-TCU, Baylor-TTU, OklahomaSt-Arkansas, UVA-Mizzou, Nebraska-UGAg (Corndawgs!), UF-LSU, Pitt-KState, Ole Miss-Kansas, WVU-MissState
12-31-2018 11:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,624
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1891
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 11:25 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Lemme just dust off my copypasta:

#TeamMegaconference
Atlantic Division: UVA, VT, UNC, NCST, Duke, WF, Pitt, WVU, UofL
Coastal Division: Clemson, USC-E, UGAg, GT, TN, FSU, UF, Auburn, UK
Southeastern Division: Alabama, Ole Miss, Miss State, LSU, Arkansas, TAMU, Texas, Vandy, Miami
Plains Division: Baylor, TCU, TTU, OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Kansas, Kansas State, Nebraska

Permanent Rivals:
Duke-GT, TN-VT, FSU-Miami, Clemson-NCST, UNC-SC, UofL-UK, Auburn-Alabama, Vandy-WF, Texas-OU, TAMU-TCU, Baylor-TTU, OklahomaSt-Arkansas, UVA-Mizzou, Nebraska-UGAg (Corndawgs!), UF-LSU, Pitt-KState, Ole Miss-Kansas, WVU-MissState

Personally, I like it. However ESPN wanted Cuse, B.C., Pitt and N.D. for a reason mostly to insert their presence into the underbelly of the Big 10.

We might look more like this:
Boston College, Kentucky, Louisville, Miami, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, West Virginia

Clemson, Duke, North Carolina, N.C. State, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Wake Forest, Vanderbilt

Alabama, Auburn, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Florida, F.S.U, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State

Arkansas, Baylor, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, T.C.U., Texas Tech

Why these?

The Old Big East lives again with some nice full additions. It's a basketball juggernaut and it allows Pitt, Va Tech, WVU, Miami, Kentucky and Louisville all a competitive path to the semis with N.D. being the perennial favorite which is great for the press. It gives Kentucky breathing room too and keeps their hoops out of North Carolina's region.

The Old core ACC plus Tennessee and Vanderbilt allows Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, and N.C. State breathing room to grow football again, but yields tremendous hoops and gives Clemson the inside track on the semis every year.

The Old core SEC plus F.S.U. essentially gives their fan bases what they crave most, strong regional brands and the dogfight there will bring national attention for football. It gives those schools a little bit of breathing room for hoops.

The Old core SWC plus Missouri, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State rivals the Southeast in intensity.

So this arrangement provides tremendous quality for T1 football in the fall with the a lot of T2 and T3 material from the two more Northerly divisions, and in the Winter it flips the intensity North for basketball. Baseball is fairly strong throughout all 4.

The leverage and total domination of the markets South of Pennsylvania keeps revenues high and bundling the 4 divisional network channels sells the product throughout the high density areas.
(This post was last modified: 01-01-2019 12:16 AM by JRsec.)
01-01-2019 12:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,624
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1891
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #39
RE: Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-28-2018 03:34 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  
(12-28-2018 03:14 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(12-27-2018 11:55 PM)Statefan Wrote:  Maryland's internal problems are probably older than most on this board. Losing graduate programs to Baltimore in 1970 hurt their future athletic donation stream. The committed the equivalent of suicide when Len Bias died and gutted the athletic department firing Lefty and replacing him with Bob Wade and then refusing to support Bobby Ross so he left for GT. At the same time the athletic department was committed by the administration of the school to fully funding Title IX despite the fact that MD did not have a graduate profile to match UVa's or UNC's needed to bankroll such spending. There is anecdotal evidence that the losses to Duke in basketball and to West Va in football were used by Kirwan to sell his desire to move MD to the Big 10. Some say MD's athletic program was purposely starved. Changing tastes and more competition in the market also hurt MD. IIRC it has only been since MD joined the Big 10 that the school administration began sending some money back to the athletic programs. MD's problems run hand in hand with Brit Kirwan. Learn more about him and you will understand Maryland's problems much better.


03-lmfao
That time period is right in my wheelhouse LP4. Graduated from Carolina in 1971.
03-old

Dog, I guess I need to be more respectful... didn't realize you guys were so old!

You better watch yourself kid! You're hanging with a grizzled crowd now!
01-01-2019 12:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lenvillecards Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,245
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Louisville
Location:
Post: #40
Conference realignment doesn’t seem likely, but Longhorn Network, ACC Network and Pac
(12-31-2018 11:16 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(12-31-2018 02:57 PM)Statefan Wrote:  
(12-31-2018 02:28 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  Why not a partial merger with the PAC?

ACC
West: USC, Stanford, Cal, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, ND

Central: Louisville, VT, Miami, NC State, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, BC

South: FSU, Clemson, GT, NC, Duke, Virginia, WF

The rest of the PAC merges with the B12 & we have our P4 with champs only CFP.

B12
West: Arizona, Arizona St, Washington State, Oregon State

North: Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech, Iowa State

South: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Baylor

Central: Kansas, Kansas State, WV, TCU


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Pacific 12's problems are cultural. College football is waning in popularity on the west coast. A number of socio-economic reasons are to blame and now USC and UCLA have to compete against the Rams and the Chargers. Remember, these are the same people who have become so weird they fail to vaccinate their children - you think they will let them play football? Trump and his anti-Kapenick kneeling tirade shines a light into this social fissure. UVa, Duke, and UNC have a problem with this now.

The distance is a problem.

Finally no one in California is really going to give a **** about college sports in NC, Va, etc.

JR can probably speak to some of this as well. If you are really well-traveled and I mean not just by airplane but by car or RV, the deep cultural taste differences in the US are easier to read. And it is a taste, mannerism, value thing such that when all three align one way they really stand out.

The ACC and SEC just need to absorb 7 of the Big 12 schools and bundle the SEC/ACC networks. Why? The west coast isn't interested in us. Locking in all of the Texas P5 schools between us along with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State gives each of our conferences multiple games in a rabid football region that reach 31 million between those 6 schools on at least 3 occasions per Saturday in the Fall.

If we wanted to add the two Kansas schools okay. But WVU should be the 7th. 3 for the ACC with N.D. joining in full and 4 for the SEC would give us 36 between us and absolute control over the finest recruiting for football, baseball, basketball, and softball in the nation. Bundling the channels puts us in most of the cable homes, (and in streaming packages) in the most population dense regions of the nation.

Having everything South of Pennsylvania (except Maryland) in the hands of ESPN means we will continue to get the best advertising rates.

Then a closer scheduling alliance between us gives ESPN the in house revenue it needs to remain flush.

What I don't favor is any scenario where the Big 10 gets into Texas via Oklahoma.


Then the question remains how do you split up the teams? Without Texas it isn’t worth it for the ACC & I’m sure that the SEC wants Texas & Oklahoma both. Would the SEC be satisfied with just 1 (Oklahoma)? If so then Oklahoma State would undoubtedly have to be go with them. Kansas & WV would make a fine duo to finish off the SEC. Who then accompanies Texas to the ACC with ND? 2 Texas schools? There isn’t much left. TCU would seem to be a solid #17 here. Does the ACC stay in Texas for #18 & take either Baylor or TT or venture north & take either Kansas State or Iowa State? You could flip Kansas State for WV but would that benefit the SEC & would the ACC accept WV? One possible solution would be for the SEC to take K State to go along with Kansas & for the ACC to take TT, leaving WV, Baylor & Iowa State out. Iowa State is to far to the northwest for either conference & to small to worry about. I guess the final question would be who the SEC would want between K St & WV?

ACC?
Inland: Texas, ND, TT, TCU, Louisville, Miami

Atlantic: FSU, Clemson, NC State, WF, Syracuse, BC

Coastal: VT, GT, NC, Duke, Virginia, Pittsburgh

SEC?
West: Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, K State or WV

Central: Alabama, Auburn, A&M, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State

East: Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, SC, Kentucky, Vandy

Dropping divisions still works here as well, even while keeping an 8 game conference schedule to allow for maximum crossover games between the two conferences. I wouldn’t be surprised if everyone, or at least almost everyone, had 1 or 2 teams they wouldn’t mind not playing on a regular basis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
01-01-2019 07:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2019 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.