Realignment talk not going away

[redswingline 1057]

2 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

On its current path you don't even have to go that far. We're looking at less than 20 teams that really matter. Everything else is window dressing.

There are different ways to interpret your opinions

['stache 21802]

42 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

https://pac-4.com/

Support us on Patreon. 🤣

[tonedeaf 56]

3 hours ago, PilotsError said:

But child rapists are?

Baptist rapist? 

[Deej 76759]

1 hour ago, Satchel said:

Pics?

[Deej 76759]

So we can now stop with people posting they enjoy college football more than the NFL because it's a purer version of the game?

[ChiTownDoc 21151]

2 minutes ago, Deej said:

So we can now stop with people posting they enjoy college football more than the NFL because it's a purer version of the game?

We are all VicMackey now.  

[bullet 1596]

27 minutes ago, Deej said:

So we can now stop with people posting they enjoy college football more than the NFL because it's a purer version of the game?

It is.  Many of them really like playing.

[Deej 76759]

Just now, bullet said:

It is.  Many of them really like playing.

So NFL guys don't like playing?

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

On its current path you don't even have to go that far. We're looking at less than 20 teams that really matter. Everything else is window dressing.

Uh, this has been true for the last 60 years, since DKR was a young coach.

[Gidnik 3268]

They have been absolutely dunking on Canzano all day long

[Pato del Muerto 52489]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

They’re a good team, but they ain’t winning the PAC unless DJU has a complete rebirth.  

He isn’t signing with the dodgers?

[Deej 76759]

Netflix needs to bring back Last Chance U and follow Pac 12 players hoping to move up to a real conference 

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2830]

1 hour ago, Deej said:

So we can now stop with people posting they enjoy college football more than the NFL because it's a purer version of the game?

I always enjoyed it simply because it was linked to a university and it wasn't as slick as the NFL.  Plus, I thought my fanbases (Texas and Stanford) were just a better class of people than those who supported pro teams. 

[Surly Bevo 24908]

Maybe we can give European Promotion/Relegation system a chance?  Pac could become the new "Championship" League.

[Deej 76759]

Just now, Surly Bevo said:

Maybe we can give European Promotion/Relegation system a chance?  Pac could become the new "Championship" League.

aggy would get relegated down to pee wee football and still finish 5th in their division.

[billfromlaketravis 11456]

17 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

What are we talking about a half share for the Beavers and Aztecs? Interesting Yormark wants SDSU over Wazzou. 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2830]

The correct answer for Stanford is "too bad so sad", but this is an interesting take - Stanford in a power conference is good for the nation's Olympic team.

  https://www.si.com/college/2023/08/06/potential-power-five-exclusion-stanford-cal-team-usa-olympics

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

2 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

We are all VicMackey now.  

I prefer my women a little slimmer 

1 hour ago, bullet said:

It is.  Many of them really like playing.

Unless you’re a rare talent, guys who don’t like playing don’t last long in the nfl

[TKthunder2 4988]

42 minutes ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

The correct answer for Stanford is "too bad so sad", but this is an interesting take - Stanford in a power conference is good for the nation's Olympic team.

  https://www.si.com/college/2023/08/06/potential-power-five-exclusion-stanford-cal-team-usa-olympics

Those athletes can transfer anywhere. Texas, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio State and many other can pump out Olympic athletes just as well as Stanford and Cal.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

10 hours ago, bullet said:

Sounds like Mizzou.  They stayed in the union, but sued them!!!

And actually, Missouri was one of the 13 stars on the Confederate flag.  There was a rump secession legislature.  Same with Kentucky.

I think we can all agree that no one likes Missouri.

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

5 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

I think we can all agree that no one likes Missouri.

I don’t think current sec teams like them either. 

[Wulaw Horn 19069]

Ok- if we were going to pare this down as much as is sensible here’s the programs/ schools that you keep I think:

alabama, auburn, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, texas, Oklahoma, aggy, lsu, Kentucky, florida state, Clemson,  North Carolina, Duke, UVA, Ohio state, Michigan, Penn State, Domers, Miami, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Washington, Oregon, USC, UCLA, Arizona, Kansas. 
 

That’s every football blue blood, every basketball blue blood and every flagship school in a state that has enough population to matter in a presidential election. 32 is a workable number. So is 40. If I was going to 40 I think I’d add: 

Stanford, BYU, Texas Tech, Ok State, Utah, Arkansas, minnesota, VA Tech 

next 8:

Iowa state, Louisville, Michigan State, West Virginia, Pittsburg, Arizona State, Mississippi, South Carolina. 
 

I think anything beyond that gets dilutive and 48 is about the. Invest number you’d need. If you wanted 52I’d go:

Colorado, Mississippi State,  BC, Nc State, 

 

i did this all off the top of my head but I feel like the first 32 would be about all the tv networks needed/cared about.  If you had that set up going on you could play 10 games in super conference and then split that into a 16 team playoff for 14 games for the champs.  That would be 160 games for the tv  networks to split up over a 12 week schedule- that would be like 13 or 14 games a week  figure on viewing windows at 11, 2:30, 6/7 and one 9:30 and that’s 4, 4, 3 and 2 games per window- call it 4 networks sharing the content- ABC/espn, fox, CBS, NBC  

if the other schools wanted to play between 33-54 or 60 they could do it on an off brand league and be on cable networks and probably still get paid enough to run their program in football  and maybe make a couple bucks, and be a part of hoops and baseball tournaments maybe.

Would those networks pay the 32 super schools something like 5B a year?  I think they might  March madness brings in 1B a year right now and nfl makes like 10B a year by comparison  seems like with that kind of set up you could get 4B a year in football and another 1B for all other sports .  
Would that be worth it for those schools to destroy the tradition and history and affiliation of the not super elite? 
maybe  

Maybe it’s be better off just setting up 32 teams and having relegation/advancement. But. It by won loss record maybe by ratings/viewership/rv desire ability where you could earn up or down and the next group of 24 can advance 4 per year or something. Then, you could have a match up or two preseason between those leagues for more content- and make a more sensible tournament format- like 24 in baseball and hoops from super league and 8 from the leftovers or something. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

Random realignment hearsay of the day from some homer whose daughter works at the SEC Network - they're planning some announcement with FSU in 2-3 weeks.  Also, it will involve two schools.

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

The correct answer for Stanford is "too bad so sad", but this is an interesting take - Stanford in a power conference is good for the nation's Olympic team.

  https://www.si.com/college/2023/08/06/potential-power-five-exclusion-stanford-cal-team-usa-olympics

Forde's daughter is an athlete at Stanford.

[billfromlaketravis 11456]

1 minute ago, Hurtlocker said:

Random realignment hearsay of the day from some homer whose daughter works at the SEC Network - they're planning some announcement with FSU in 2-3 weeks.  Also, it will involve two schools.

If true, given the expediency, Clemson is the second school. Shit. South Carolina is 23rd in population. Alabama is 27th. Mississippi is 34th. 
 

All 3 states could have 2 SEC members soon. Way to bring Iger to his knees. 

[gatormarc 911]

12 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I don’t think current sec teams like them either. 

I think throwing them in the east rather than realigning the divisions back in 2012 didn't do them any favors.

Those of us who play them annually don't necessarily interact with their alumni. 

[ATXhorn17 1617]

If true, given the expediency, Clemson is the second school. Shit. South Carolina is 23rd in population. Alabama is 27th. Mississippi is 34th. 
 
All 3 states could have 2 SEC members soon. Way to bring Iger to his knees. 

Clemson would be a mistake… If they revert to mediocrity post-Dabo, they bring literally nothing else to the table.

[Gatorubet 30209]

21 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I don’t think current sec teams like them either. 

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

20 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Random realignment hearsay of the day from some homer whose daughter works at the SEC Network - they're planning some announcement with FSU in 2-3 weeks.  Also, it will involve two schools.

I’m stunned. I’m pissed. It’s Notre Dame. 

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

2 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

Some cold water on this. 

 

[kopp0e 1135]

21 minutes ago, ATXhorn17 said:

Clemson would be a mistake… If they revert to mediocrity post-Dabo, they bring literally nothing else to the table.

I think B1G needs Clemson & 1 team in Florida, along with Georgia Tech/ Duke +Notre Dame and probably Stanford to seal Irish...

If B1G is locked out of Texas/ southeast, well B1G will likely be lucky to win 2 titles per decade, long term there needs balancing...

[Vertigo 20276]

11 minutes ago, kopp0e said:

I think B1G needs Clemson & 1 team in Florida, along with Georgia Tech/ Duke +Notre Dame and probably Stanford to seal Irish...

If B1G is locked out of Texas/ southeast, well B1G will likely be lucky to win 2 titles per decade, long term there needs balancing...

FSU to the B1G would be an error by the SEC. I dont think they let that happen. I could see Miami, but I dont think that brings the impact FSU would. The B1G dream scenario would be Notre Dame + Stanford. That would have them all giving blow jobs to each other in the faculty lounge plus give them two huge athletics brands.

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Vertigo

[TKthunder2 4988]

54 minutes ago, ATXhorn17 said:

Clemson would be a mistake… If they revert to mediocrity post-Dabo, they bring literally nothing else to the table.

Again this is just plain wrong. Clemson has a top 15 stadium by capacity, is top 15 is all time wins, and has the most ACC titles. While Dabo has been great for Clemson you can’t assign him credit for all of that.

There are 24 teams with home stadiums with 70k+ seats. 21 of those are current/future members of the BigTen/SEC. The other 3?

Clemson 81,500
Florida State 79,500
Notre Dame 77,600

These are the top football schools left on the board. This shouldn’t really be an argument here.

Edited August 7, 2023 by TKthunder2

[LateAughtsHorn 588]

4 hours ago, Deej said:

So we can now stop with people posting they enjoy college football more than the NFL because it's a purer version of the game?

I've never understood the weird snobbery college fans have about NFL fans. Zero self awareness on how ridiculous us college football fans look to normal people. Lol

[LateAughtsHorn 588]

53 minutes ago, ATXhorn17 said:

Clemson would be a mistake… If they revert to mediocrity post-Dabo, they bring literally nothing else to the table.

It would be a mistake for the SEC to leave any viable football brand in the south on the table. If the Big 10 gets even one of Clemson or FSU, they could lay claim to being the only true "national conference". 

[USC Traveler 488]

3 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

 

I wonder if Clownzano is still saying everyone is sticking together, and that getting a better deal than the B12 is a "layup" ? 🤣

Scheer has nailed this whole saga since USC and UCLA left.  He was calling out the bad tv deal early on.

SDSU and OSU could make sense for the B12, especially at a deep discount.  

Would bring them up to 6 schools to host "After Dark" games.  If each school hosts 2-3 After Dark games, that gives them a season plus worth of games.

SDSU has beaten a lot of the PAC the last few years, has high level hoops, and brings recruiting access in a talent-rich area.

OSU will be competitive.  They won't be a perennial power, but as long as Smith is there, there will be years where they're in the mix at the end.  Full disclosure- I have a soft spot for the Beavs, so even though I have enduring nightmares of some SC games in Corvallis, I hope they make it to the B12.

//

It says a lot about how pathetic Cal is that they're not the other school in the mix with SDSU.  Probably a bunch of B12 schools enjoying some payback.

Brutal news for Wazzu.  As always in realignment, everyone is committed to their conference until they're not.  

//

3 pods of 6 ?  Not the cleanest fit.  

3-7-7 with a 10 game schedule would work well.  

Networks probably kick in some extra cash to pay for these last two additions for the full "After Dark" window and the 10th game.

Then sit back and wait to pick up 2-6 ACC schools once the final reckoning happens.

Edited August 7, 2023 by USC Traveler

[Texas Wahoo 3391]

1 hour ago, TKthunder2 said:

Again this is just plain wrong. Clemson has a top 15 stadium by capacity, is top 15 is all time wins, and has the most ACC titles. While Dabo has been great for Clemson you can’t assign him credit for all of that.

There are 24 teams with home stadiums with 70k+ seats. 21 of those are current/future members of the BigTen/SEC. The other 3?

Clemson 81,500
Florida State 79,500
Notre Dame 77,600

These are the top football schools left on the board. This shouldn’t really be an argument here.

I don’t necessarily disagree with your larger point, but a lot of this was because the ACC pre-FSU joining (which is when Clemson won pre-Dabo) was hot garbage. I know beating out Maryland, NC State, and Duke for the most ACC championships is pretty exciting. Then a real football team joined in FSU and they rattled off 9 straight and 12/14 ACC championships.  

[LateAughtsHorn 588]

36 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I don’t necessarily disagree with your larger point, but a lot of this was because the ACC pre-FSU joining (which is when Clemson won pre-Dabo) was hot garbage. I know beating out Maryland, NC State, and Duke for the most ACC championships is pretty exciting. Then a real football team joined in FSU and they rattled off 9 straight and 12/14 ACC championships.  

I always forget that FSU was an independent when Bowden really started building that thing. 

[pops 6983]

3 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Random realignment hearsay of the day from some homer whose daughter works at the SEC Network - they're planning some announcement with FSU in 2-3 weeks.  Also, it will involve two schools.

I see I wasn't the only one driving today listening to some random call in show on Sirius xm

[DFW Horn 6123]

7 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Some cold water on this. 

 

SDSU at a discounted rate might make sense, but rural OSU lite brings nothing to the table.

Wazzu and OSU are better MWC fits.

[hawkfan 60]

6 hours ago, USC Traveler said:

Then sit back and wait to pick up 2-6 ACC schools once the final reckoning happens.

This is where the B1G has to stick the landing. 

If they want a true "national" conference, they need to be going to FSU/Miami and offering them both to get a strong presence in Florida, then probably offer UNC/UVA to get the flagship school in those two states.  Once the ACC is dead, add ND/Stanford.  Then go to 11 conference games and make regional divisions like an NFL lite that preserves close to all your important rivalries:

Pacific Division

Notre Dame

USC

UCLA

Oregon

Washington

Stanford

Great Plains Division

Wisconsin

Nebraska

Iowa

Minnesota

Illinois

Northwestern

Great Lakes Division

Ohio State

Michigan

Michigan State

Purdue

Indiana

Rutgers

Atlantic Division

Penn State

Florida State

Miami

North Carolina

Virginia

Maryland

With 11 conference games you just play the 5 schools in your division + six from another division that rotates every year.  Rutgers is the only school that feels truly out of place there, but fuck them.  Notre Dame doesn't want to be viewed as "midwest", and would want to preserve the USC game, which the above accomplishes.

The only negative of that path is the Great Plains Division is a little weak, but really there isn't a perfect way to balance competitive balance with preserving geography/rivalries, and since the schedule would be formed by the divisions rotating every year, one division being weaker than another isn't as big of a problem as it is right now where the B1G West is currently guaranteed a spot in the CCG - they'd have to earn it in the above model.  I feel like permanent division become necessary after a conference gets this big - the scheduling gets too hard for fans to follow without them.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

5 hours ago, pops said:

I see I wasn't the only one driving today listening to some random call in show on Sirius xm

Haha i had 14 hours driving and couldn't remember which one it was, but I remember it giving me a chuckle when he said, "She can't say nothin because NDAs and all that but its the one the BoR said we need more money, so you figure it out"   He was so sneaky.

[LTtxfan 49170]

7 hours ago, LateAughtsHorn said:

I've never understood the weird snobbery college fans have about NFL fans. Zero self awareness on how ridiculous us CFB fans look to normal people. Lol

Lol

[Lidig8r 1871]

39 minutes ago, hawkfan said:

This is where the B1G has to stick the landing. 

If they want a true "national" conference, they need to be going to FSU/Miami and offering them both to get a strong presence in Florida, then probably offer UNC/UVA to get the flagship school in those two states.  Once the ACC is dead, add ND/Stanford.  Then go to 11 conference games and make regional divisions like an NFL lite that preserves close to all your important rivalries:

Pacific Division

Notre Dame

USC

UCLA

Oregon

Washington

Stanford

Great Plains Division

Wisconsin

Nebraska

Iowa

Minnesota

Illinois

Northwestern

Great Lakes Division

Ohio State

Michigan

Michigan State

Purdue

Indiana

Rutgers

Atlantic Division

Penn State

Florida State

Miami

North Carolina

Virginia

Maryland

With 11 conference games you just play the 5 schools in your division + six from another division that rotates every year.  Rutgers is the only school that feels truly out of place there, but fuck them.  Notre Dame doesn't want to be viewed as "midwest", and would want to preserve the USC game, which the above accomplishes.

The only negative of that path is the Great Plains Division is a little weak, but really there isn't a perfect way to balance competitive balance with preserving geography/rivalries, and since the schedule would be formed by the divisions rotating every year, one division being weaker than another isn't as big of a problem as it is right now where the B1G West is currently guaranteed a spot in the CCG - they'd have to earn it in the above model.  I feel like permanent division become necessary after a conference gets this big - the scheduling gets too hard for fans to follow without them.

Soooooooo.... you take Wisconsin, whose border is touched by not just one, but TWO of the Great Lakes ... and you put them in the Great Plains Division?

Then you take Rutgers, which actually borders the Atlantic Ocean ... and you put them in the Great Lakes Division?

Then, you take Penn State, which borders one of the Great Lakes ... and you put them in the Atlantic Division?

Then, you take Minnesota, which borders both Canada and one of the Great Lakes ... and you put them in the Great Plains Division?

Then, you take Notre Dame, which is in Indiana, which is 2 time zones, and which at closest, is 6 states away from the Pacific Ocean, and put them in the Pacific Ocean?

Uh..... alrighty then!

[LTtxfan 49170]

[Left Coast 863]

The B1G has already said no more divisions, so you don’t need to waste your time coming up with potential divisions. They already made it clear that each team will have anywhere from 0-3 protected “rivalries” and with the addition of UW and Oregon it’s obvious that they will be protected rivals of each other.

The interesting question will be if they make UW/UO “protected rivals” of USC/UCLA too. On the one hand that would reduce West Coast travel for the rest of the B1G. On the other I can imagine USC especially not liking that since there seems to be some animosity with Oregon (and not in a “friendly rivalry” kind of way).

['stache 21802]

Each team having a different number of “protected” games sounds like a complete nightmare. And having some with zero regular games is odd. Conferences are gonna be a complete clusterfuck going forward. 

[gatormarc 911]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

Each team having a different number of “protected” games sounds like a complete nightmare. And having some with zero regular games is odd. Conferences are gonna be a complete clusterfuck going forward. 

B1G teams like to give all of their rivalries names and trophies but don't actually want to play the games.

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Each team having a different number of “protected” games sounds like a complete nightmare. And having some with zero regular games is odd. Conferences are gonna be a complete clusterfuck going forward. 

So you're saying pods?