Jump to content

Realignment talk not going away

The Tower

By The Tower
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by Sandbagging Steve,

How many teams will be left when the dust settles in a few years? I think there's a way for all the teams to still have some involvement. I will explain that at the end of this list. Here's my list of the top 32 programs and a list if it goes to 48. There's some debate if it goes to 48, but not much debate if it stops at 32. I guess one could debate Arizona State, but that's about it. The top 32 at least come close to carrying their own weight. Everyone below that line is losing money for t

This is great content for free.

Recommended by immamac

  • Hook 'Em

6 reactions

Go to this post
Hurtlocker

Hurtlocker 2212

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Hagbard Celine said:

i may be forgetting someone....  with the exception of penn state, ohio state and louisiana state, the public state flagship football program is a school named after the state that does not have the word "state" in the name of the school.

the really strong cardinals are every bit the equal of your state flagship...  but you're still not the state flagship

0b1efb905122bdfae88874ce16db4c33.png

Seems New Mexico State too!   Makes more sense in university systems, like Cal, Texas, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, or North Carolina, but big, first, and public are the primary.   Surprised Arizona didn't make this list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 36.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bullet

    1507

  • Hurtlocker

    1322

  • Al_4_ISU

    1079

  • BurntOrange&White

    976

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Hiphopopotamos
Hiphopopotamos
MAUFRAIS
MAUFRAIS

Aggy should abstain so the vote is 13-0 and then we can then brand it on their dog.

jofus
jofus

Posted Images

bullet

bullet 1596

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, statsman said:

Sure. But there is that damning Freeh report, so they look like fools and worse when they deny it or make excuses for Joe. The rational ones know it. 
 
As noted above, Baylor suppressed their internal report and paid off victims. There were reports by at least three victims of going black, and waking up with evidence of having had sex, and then told by friends that there were videos of them being gang banged from that night being shared. It appears that it might have been a rite of passage for Baylor football to roofie a girl and run a train on her. 
 
We’ll never know for sure; Baylor shut that shit down and paid the girls off, making sure an NDA was part of it. 
 
And that’s why Baylor fans will tell you that Briles was railroaded, that nothing happened at Baylor that doesn’t happen everywhere, because they made sure to keep it all in house. The Big 12 formally voted and requested the verbal report the BoR received. Baylor refused. 
 
The poster above said I have an irrational hatred of Baylor. Maybe I do. Jesus said that what we do for the least of them, we do to or for him. Well, if you put it that way, Baylor roofied Jesus, tan a train on Him, and when He sought help the next day, Baylor told Him to shut up and transfer or be exposed as a slut. (I have used that description before on this site; that’s when the Baylor sympathizers beg me). 
 
What does this have to do with realignment? Simple- Baylor is a shitty conference mate, and not a victim. It sucks that we have to let Baylor distribute some tickets to their games against us in Austin, almost certainly bringing some horrible ex players into our stadium. Leaving Baylor behind is a bonus feature of realignment and not a bug. 

I've got a number of Baylor friends and they aren't anything like you say.  They are horribly embarrassed by what Baylor did.

Penn St. is a pretty shitty conference mate.  After Sandusky, they hired Franklin, the guy who tried to cover up a rape at Vanderbilt (yeah, Vandy does it too).  And any conference would take Penn St.  As for cheating, future SEC mates A&M and Auburn join SMU among the cheatingest programs in NCAA history.  On top of that, aggy is a cult.

Baylor's got a pretty bad history.  Not sure Dave Bliss wasn't worse than Briles.  After all, someone got murdered.  But if you want pristine, you join the Ivy League.  Wait, didn't they take bribes to admit rich people's kids as fake athletes?  Kind of the opposite of normal where they bring in fake students to be athletes (see Oklahoma St. and Dexter Manley,  North Carolina and Mary Willingham, Georgia and Jan Kemp).

So what's it got to do with conference realignment?  Absolutely nothing.  Its about dollars.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1596

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Unless I'm missing some distinction, there are plenty of schools out there that don't claim a title that they were awarded by someone other than the AP/Coaches/BCS.

I know Florida doesn't claim 1984 or 1985.

Are you sure Florida is in the SEC?!!!

I didn't know until I went to Neyland Stadium that Tennessee claims virtually every national title that Alabama doesn't claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bullet

bullet 1596

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

 

supertroopers-brian-cox-purpleshit.gif.7f15426b1b393f6bf3d2bcbf53284110.gif

 

So lets just take the worst qualities of the AAC and the old CUSA, the nonexistant regionality and patchwork of misfit institutions, and crank it up to 11 by smashing together the AAC 11, PAC4 and MWC3...

 

 

Tulsa, Navy and Charlotte (+ Wichita St.) left out according to this.  I think Tulsa would rate ahead of some of the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKthunder2

TKthunder2 4988

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, bullet said:

But if you want pristine, you join the Ivy League.  Wait, didn't they take bribes to admit rich people's kids as fake athletes?  Kind of the opposite of normal where they bring in fake students to be athletes (see Oklahoma St. and Dexter Manley,  North Carolina and Mary Willingham, Georgia and Jan Kemp).

Hey now…let’s not go too far now.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/college-admissions-scandal-ex-university-texas-tennis-coach-gets-6-n1142246

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Evil Bill Obrien

Evil Bill Obrien 3275

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, bullet said:

Tulsa, Navy and Charlotte (+ Wichita St.) left out according to this.  I think Tulsa would rate ahead of some of the others.

Didn't even notice they left both Navy and Air Force out of this bogus conference...both of those better options than a good portion of this basket of misfit schools. Think you are right about Tulsa too, better than FAU and Temple at the very least. Not really better than Cal but at least Tulsa actually gives a shit about football. 

Edited by Evil Bill Obrien
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deej

Deej 76759

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, bullet said:

They are horribly embarrassed by what Baylor did.

Maybe they should stand up and demand those involved in the rapes and the coverup be exposed, and the details properly investigated and shared, but hey, they admit privately they are embarrassed. Such brave souls.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12457

Posted
Posted
From Reddit’s Big XII page:8B6CC591-C89B-4363-BA14-E20647E86B27.thumb.jpeg.edeaafc660f27b5a67c32ac6d82e6411.jpeg
I want to see the vote totals, but I have to vote, and for the life of me, can’t think of one to pick. 

The Big 10 and SEC aren’t adding any of the current Big 12 schools.

That’s why they’re in the Big 12, and it’s also what’s made the Big 12 stable.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5457

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

 

 

Damn Big 12 schools out there killing rivalry games...when will the Realignment casualties end??

When I used to buy TCU season tix, as a way to ensure getting UT game tix every other year, the SMU game was one of the few you could usually get close to face value for on StubHub. 
 
What’s the reason for dropping?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5457

Posted
Posted (edited)

If conferences go to ten games, why do the best nonconference games have to go away? Why not the FCS?

(I may be regarded o this subject because in my senior year, Texas’ nonconference schedule was Bo Jackson’s Auburn, PSU (coming off a NC) and OU. 

Edited by statsman
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Don Johnson

Don Johnson 4753

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, statsman said:

When I used to buy TCU season tix, as a way to ensure getting UT game tix every other year, the SMU game was one of the few you could usually get close to face value for on StubHub. 
 
What’s the reason for dropping?

TCU wants to be the only P5 option in DFW.  They have kept SMU out of any Big 12 conversations and want SMU to become (more) irrelevant.

 

This is just another example.  SMU beat TCU in 2019 and 2021, and the 2020 game was one of the biggest puss outs in history.  Covid year, supposed to play in Dallas.  Because of Covid and Big 12 rules, TCU could only play home games.  SMU offered to give up the home game and play in Ft. Worth.  TCU declined and replaced SMU with Tennessee Tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12457

Posted
Posted
If conferences go to ten games, why do the best nonconference games have to go away? Why not the FCS?
(I may be regarded o this subject because in my senior year, Texas’ nonconference schedule was Bo Jackson’s Auburn, PSU (coming off a NC) and OU. 

Guaranteed home games
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pasken

Pasken 1309

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:


The Big 10 and SEC aren’t adding any of the current Big 12 schools.

That’s why they’re in the Big 12, and it’s also what’s made the Big 12 stable.

I don't think it's crazy that the big 10 would be interested in Kansas. It's adjacent to their current footprint. Great basketball program. Maybe be willing to not take a full share given how unremarkable the football program is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HookEm

HookEm 2467

Posted
Posted

I think the correct answer is Kansas.  They are the flagship school in their state.  They are one of the 2-3 biggest names in CBB.  There is a power vacuum in the Big 12 that they could fill if they had a competitive football team. 

But they don't really care about football at all and probably never will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sir Ulrich

Sir Ulrich 5187

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, HookEm said:

I think the correct answer is Kansas.  They are the flagship school in their state.  They are one of the 2-3 biggest names in CBB.  There is a power vacuum in the Big 12 that they could fill if they had a competitive football team. 

But they don't really care about football at all and probably never will. 

 

They care about football now that they see the value Oregon/Washington just added by investing in it. 10 solid seasons and they would be a good Big 10 add if they add to go to 24

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21802

Posted
Posted

KU would be on BIGs radar if they went to 24, but still unlikely, regardless of the football stadium upgrade, which is long, long, long overdue. I always harbored some hope that Mizzou would get its BIG invite, which it wanted originally, and OKST would get an SEC invite, but that's like .000000000000000000000001% at this point, so KU is really the only plausible contender to make it into BIG/SEC. I think WVU/Cincy/UCF are possible ACC candidates down the road, but it would be a lateral move prestige-wise, and makes more sense geographically, so I don't think anyone would sweat those moves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21802

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, bullet said:

Tulsa, Navy and Charlotte (+ Wichita St.) left out according to this.  I think Tulsa would rate ahead of some of the others.

He posted a few different permutations apparently. This one makes the most sense but is still off, imo. I don't see UNT or UTSA making this grouping, and SMU would go west so that Stanford and Cal could at least feel a littel appeased academically being in a division with Rice, SMU, and AF.

 

Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Al_4_ISU

Al_4_ISU 12457

Posted
Posted
KU would be on BIGs radar if they went to 24, but still unlikely, regardless of the football stadium upgrade, which is long, long, long overdue. I always harbored some hope that Mizzou would get its BIG invite, which it wanted originally, and OKST would get an SEC invite, but that's like .000000000000000000000001% at this point, so KU is really the only plausible contender to make it into BIG/SEC. I think WVU/Cincy/UCF are possible ACC candidates down the road, but it would be a lateral move prestige-wise, and makes more sense geographically, so I don't think anyone would sweat those moves. 

I don’t think the ACC will exist in a decade, and this a main reason that KU won’t get a Big 10 invite.

There are at least 4 ACC schools that fit better with what the Big 10 is doing than they do, and provide more financial upside.
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Wahoo

Texas Wahoo 3391

Posted
Posted

Interesting article on the ACC.  I particularly noted the reason for NC State's no-vote on expansion - not that they have anywhere to go, but they want to be tied to UNC (and thus presumably in the ACC forever).

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38198507/acc-florida-state-college-football-2023-conference-realignment

 

Quote

Why was NC State not in favor of expansion? The dynamics in the state of North Carolina provide a fascinating window into the North Carolina-NC State relationship. North Carolina is one of the most attractive schools in the country to both the SEC and Big Ten, should those conferences decide to expand further.

NC State holds power within the University of North Carolina System and the state legislature. Siding with North Carolina essentially signals the Wolfpack believe their future is tied with UNC.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zhorn96

Zhorn96 1773

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Interesting article on the ACC.  I particularly noted the reason for NC State's no-vote on expansion - not that they have anywhere to go, but they want to be tied to UNC (and thus presumably in the ACC forever).

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38198507/acc-florida-state-college-football-2023-conference-realignment

 

 

yeah, its not dead yet apparently.  ND, Cal, Furd all focused on swaying UNC is the backchannel rumor I'm hearing from the West Coast.  Since FSU and Clemson didn't bolt, status quo opens the door again.  We'll see.  The rest of this week will be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 21802

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

Interesting article on the ACC.  I particularly noted the reason for NC State's no-vote on expansion - not that they have anywhere to go, but they want to be tied to UNC (and thus presumably in the ACC forever).

 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38198507/acc-florida-state-college-football-2023-conference-realignment

 

 

Lol, if true, NCState has some terribly stupid leadership. The "stick together" line got brought up a lot during realignment, and not once has worked or played out. The closest result was UCLA apparently paying Cal a portion of its new revenues, but even that is because they are literally the same system, so its reallocating money from one branch to another. If the ACC is officially dead, and the BIG only wants UNC, they gone, and NCState is left behind. 

Edit: So I guess NC State is governed by UNC, similar to Arizona and ASU being managed by the same regents, so I guess there's more there than other situations, but I still don't see any board of regents letting UNC get left behind because neither BIG nor SEC wanted NC State. 

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
USC Traveler

USC Traveler 488

Posted
Posted
On 8/14/2023 at 12:53 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

It wouldn’t even bother me if the Top 16 revenue generators got together and made their own super league and left 17-70 with our own division.

I realize that Texas and Iowa State are very different things.  

 

On 8/14/2023 at 2:27 PM, Al_4_ISU said:

If the TV networks force there to be 40 schools with playoff access, based on current Big 10 and SEC membership, the bulk of the Big 12 and ACC would be relegated, and those fanbases would heavily punch out.

 @Al_4_ISU, @'stache, @oSuJeff97 @LTbear- would you guys watch the top 16 league in the first scenario ?  Or only watch the 17-70 league ?

Does 17-70 feel inclusive because all similarly-resourced current "P5" teams would be in it, with only the top 16 being in a different league, whereas a 41-70 league would feel like relegation because 24 schools with similar to worse profiles than ISU, OSU, etc got in the top league simply because of historic ties ?

Would you rather compete in a 12 team playoff where B12 teams will usually get 2 slots, but will rarely get the benefit of the doubt from the committee and be unlikely to win it all ?  Or better to compete on an equal footing financially in the 17-70 league and have a very good chance to win it all ?

 

I've been thinking that the best way for the networks to retain viewership in the long run is to keep something similar to the current playoff structure, so that B12 fans and others will still be invested in games in the BIG and SEC, as the outcome of those games will affect at-large bids.  And then everyone would obviously watch the playoffs.  

But the one thing I've always disliked about CFB is the reliance on polls and rankings to determine a champ instead of direct, on-field results.

Al's post about the top 16 league has me wondering if the networks would get the best of both worlds with a top 16/20/24 league and a 17/21/25-80 league.

The 16/20/24 league would play an NFL type of schedule and playoff.  The 17-80 league would look like CFB used to, with regional divisions, but with a playoff featuring the top two teams from each division.  

No more polls, committees, rankings, etc.  There's a lot to like there.  I'd watch both leagues.    Curious what other people think.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TKthunder2

TKthunder2 4988

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Don Johnson said:

TCU wants to be the only P5 option in DFW.  They have kept SMU out of any Big 12 conversations and want SMU to become (more) irrelevant.

 

This is just another example.  SMU beat TCU in 2019 and 2021, and the 2020 game was one of the biggest puss outs in history.  Covid year, supposed to play in Dallas.  Because of Covid and Big 12 rules, TCU could only play home games.  SMU offered to give up the home game and play in Ft. Worth.  TCU declined and replaced SMU with Tennessee Tech.

Same reason aggy didn’t want to play Texas and wanted to be the only Texas team in the SEC. They scared.

They want to be DFW’s only P4 team. SMU has more alumni money (for NIL), better academics, and is in the biggest/most recognizable city in the metro. Losing to them in games or via recruits (high school or transfers) is too much risk for them.

TCU will steal their “come home to DFW” shtick and take the SEC/B1G dropouts and JUCO stars and promote their playoff wins over Michigan and their Rose Bowl wins over Wisconsin. If they keep playing and SMU wins a few in a row they’ll just say TCU is ancient history. If TCU stops playing them, then their is not much SMU can do to ever level the playing field.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hurtlocker

Hurtlocker 2212

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Herpa Derpa said:

Not a flagship. UA, ASU and NAU are all under one BOR since 1945. 100 or so pages back should have told ya.

Most state schools are under one BoR, his original point was about Iowa and Iowa State and the State of Iowa has one BoR last I checked. 

 

2 hours ago, Al_4_ISU said:

I wonder if there’s an internet belief that the Big 12 will go to 10 conference games to provide inventory?

There’s a lot of talk in Iowa of both the Big 10 and Big 12 going to 10 conference games and the CyHawk game dying as a result.

80-90 games is a lot of inventory, twice as much as the contract the B12 just extended.   I can't imagine they do this on the current contract without a price jump.  Expansion alone is going to drive a ton to streaming, as you're already seeing with B1G teams not named USC/OSU/Mich/Pedo and the B12 could probably add a conference network at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vertigo

Vertigo 20276

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sir Ulrich said:

 

They care about football now that they see the value Oregon/Washington just added by investing in it. 10 solid seasons and they would be a good Big 10 add if they add to go to 24

 

It's cute how they have a full stadium in the renderings. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...