Some Random Thoughts on Conference Realignment

LonghornDave

LonghornDave

1,000+ Posts
The worst thing about all of the movement and quick decisions is that it will seriously cause ridiculous travel costs, particularly in nonrevenue-producing sports. Ultimately it seems like the regional conferences for most (all) women and non-baseball, football, and basketball sports should be rethought and rebuilt.

As far as football, baseball and basketball I suggest that the divisions should be more geographical and related to old rivalries and function more like the Premiere league with 64 teams in and all the others can play in (or out) each year. It's fair and would make the most money and add interest and drama over time.

It also occurs to me that if Clemson and FSU leave the ACC are they losing anything by not getting an ACC cut and if they are paid a share by the new league? Probably not. There is no other football left except ND who is likely weighing their own options. Big Ten seems out front but ND would make more money in SEC. The rest of ACC doesn't sit through an entire football game in my experience.

Big is getting good programs with Oregon and Washington. The problem is BIG needs to subtract a lot to be a strong league. USC really was the brand in Pac and the rest including UCLA are casual fans at best. They have their moments but not day in and day out. For example, I bought Texas v UCLA tickets on the 50, an hour before kickoff at the Box Office at face value. Texas v OU V Am v Arky v LSU v OLE Miss V Bama etc sell out every year no matter what. Last year Texas was a 20 point Dog to Bama, sold out. That does not happen at most Big Schools or Pac or ACC or Big 12 schools for "non Premiere" games and even then no. The worst thing about SEC is the stupid and rampant directional school filler. Embarrassing. End it now.

I am sad for Stanford, they do it right.
 
LonghornDave said:
The worst thing about all of the movement and quick decisions is that it will seriously cause ridiculous travel costs, particularly in nonrevenue-producing sports. Ultimately it seems like the regional conferences for most (all) women and non-baseball, football, and basketball sports should be rethought and rebuilt.

As far as football, baseball and basketball I suggest that the divisions should be more geographical and related to old rivalries and function more like the Premiere league with 64 teams in and all the others can play in (or out) each year. It's fair and would make the most money and add interest and drama over time.

It also occurs to me that if Clemson and FSU leave the ACC are they losing anything by not getting an ACC cut and if they are paid a share by the new league? Probably not. There is no other football left except ND who is likely weighing their own options. Big Ten seems out front but ND would make more money in SEC. The rest of ACC doesn't sit through an entire football game in my experience.

Big is getting good programs with Oregon and Washington. The problem is BIG needs to subtract a lot to be a strong league. USC really was the brand in Pac and the rest including UCLA are casual fans at best. They have their moments but not day in and day out. For example, I bought Texas v UCLA tickets on the 50, an hour before kickoff at the Box Office at face value. Texas v OU V Am v Arky v LSU v OLE Miss V Bama etc sell out every year no matter what. Last year Texas was a 20 point Dog to Bama, sold out. That does not happen at most Big Schools or Pac or ACC or Big 12 schools for "non Premiere" games and even then no. The worst thing about SEC is the stupid and rampant directional school filler. Embarrassing. End it now.

I am sad for Stanford, they do it right.
Click to expand...
And if history tells us anything on conference realignment, it can become unraveled again in the future due to the realities of the almighty tv and ticket dollars.
But I would much rather be UT than bailer for example when this all finally sorts out after the grim reaper finishes with the future of athletics.
 
About 10(ish) yrs ago I made a hairy, wild-*** speculation about UTSA winding up in the Big XII. I was (rightfully?) har-hared off the thread. However, in this crazy era of "fruit-basket turn over", who's to say?!?!
 
When Texas and OU announced their exit, I thought the Big XII was finished. Toast.

They seemed a little desperate inviting the likes of Houston, Cincinnati, etc, but gotta give it to them.....they survived.

I don't know if it was pure luck or part of a master plan, but they're about to eviscerate the PAC. Not a blue blood in sight, but nonetheless, they will survive.
 
LC,

I submit that if the Big XII had had a real commissioner, he would have already been in discussions with Clemson, FSU, UNC, UVA, SDSU, Stanford, Utah, Washington & Oregon about some kind of survival mode. I see no way that the four ACC schools would have moved, but the Wesst Coast schools would have had to listen. Leadership can be a wondrful thing, but unfortunately we wouldn't know in the Big XII..
 
F2kNmN_XIAAq-4m
 
I would have figured five 16-team conferences would have been the "new FBS" a couple of years ago, but it's looking more and more like four 20-team conferences is the way.
 
11,

More like two large conferences and a couple of wannabes. Tech & oSu appear to be getting screwed by the Pac. They would likely have been coupled with Clemson & FSU while joining the SEC. Now the SEC has possible opportunities with UVA, UNC, and possibly a couple of West Coast schools. Not saying that's going to happen, but that it will get consideration.
 
Horns11 said:
I would have figured five 16-team conferences would have been the "new FBS" a couple of years ago, but it's looking more and more like four 20-team conferences is the way.
Click to expand...
Each of the 4x20 conferences will essentially split games down the middle, re-creating in effect 8x10 team conferences.
 
I don't know what those scales are measuring.

If they measure, for instance, the financial drain on each member school's resources due to dilution of TV money, then those scales are very correct.
 
SabreHorn said:
11,

More like two large conferences and a couple of wannabes. Tech & oSu appear to be getting screwed by the Pac. They would likely have been coupled with Clemson & FSU while joining the SEC. Now the SEC has possible opportunities with UVA, UNC, and possibly a couple of West Coast schools. Not saying that's going to happen, but that it will get consideration.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I feel bad for the good schools being left behind and it is made worse by the crummy schools that "made it" by happenstance. Really wish everyone would take a deep breath and create a merit-based system that more or less exists in every sport except College Football. The SEC is pretty good from top to bottom but jeez TT and OSU are better overall than some. And BIG is full of fluff in most years. I get that every dog has their day (except Kansas and MSU, aggie, etc. but there you be a two-level regional season and playoffs like Soccer, its fair, and interesting and creates drama in the lower and upper tiers. And the aggie APP State game would name the lower tier champion some years.
 
Top Tier: B1G, $EC
First Lower Tier: ACC
Second Lower Tier: Big XII
Third Lower Tier: AAC
Fourth Lower Tier: Everyone else in FBS
Left out of FBS: ND until they join a conference (probably the ACC) which would narrow the gap to the Top Tier.

The Big XII screwed themselves by letting Central Florida, Cincinnati, Colorado, and Cougar High in as these only suck money away from the other members. In hindsight, the Big XII should have held their powder and merged with what will be left of the PAC-12.
 
ViperHorn said:
Top Tier: B1G, $EC
First Lower Tier: ACC
Second Lower Tier: Big XII
Third Lower Tier: AAC
Fourth Lower Tier: Everyone else in FBS
Left out of FBS: ND until they join a conference (probably the ACC) which would narrow the gap to the Top Tier.

The Big XII screwed themselves by letting Central Florida, Cincinnati, Colorado, and Cougar High in as these only suck money away from the other members. In hindsight, the Big XII should have held their powder and merged with what will be left of the PAC-12.
Click to expand...
Yes, but Pac wanted no part of TCU and Baylor. Not a Baylor fan but Baylor and TCU are better than several Pac teams day in and day out. In all sports.
 
Ok so USC and UCLA go to Big Ten. Football makes sense for them but why does the BIG take UCLA? They are not football fans and Stanford has similar football and has all sports. Many large and small colleges can serve up an occasionally competitive basketball team but who will USC play baseball against or FSU or Clemson? Baseball is essentially dead in the BIG which is why when we were flirting w the idea we would have had to go independent in baseball on the BIG. I cannot imagine anyone paying for the BIG baseball tournament. Yikes.
 
Dave,

Tech & oSu need to pull the Kansas schools and TCU, grab the PAC leftovers that they want, cut a TV deal with caveats for who is included, and form a new conference leaving the rap runt and his original selections in the dust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top