College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

[dxmnkd316]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I posted this on GPL as well, but if this happens to be true, I figure the divisions will be as follows:

West:
Michigan State
Michigan
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Nebraska
Mizzou

East:
Penn State
Ohio State
Indiana
Purdue
Illinois
Northwestern
Rutgers

It preserves all of the current permanent games, trophy games (except the Penn State-Minnesota, but quite frankly no one gives a **** about it), and actually adds an existing interconference rivalry (probably new trophy) game (illinois-mizzou).

This means that each team plays each team in the division once, one permanent cross-division game, and one rotating cross-division game.

The permanent cross-division games are as follows:

Michigan State - Penn State (Land Grant Trophy)
Michigan - Ohio State
Minnesota - Northwestern
Iowa - Purdue
Wisconsin - Rutgers
Nebraska - Indiana
Mizzou - Illinois (Arch Rivalry)

If notre dame accepts, this all goes out the window. But honestly, we all know they are too arrogant to see the writing on the wall. As an added bonus, doesn't add to the chance of creating a Big Ten Hockey Conference.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

One has to wonder what this would do to the Big East even with a scenario involving the loss of only one league member (I'm sure the Big 12 is fine in this case). 7 teams is getting to the point where the other conferences might start to seriously reconsider their auto bid and its not like the Conference USA slate of replacements is going to get anyone excited. God forbid this sets off a round of conference raiding from the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 reshuffling.

The scenario where the SEC grabs say aTm and Clemson forcing the ACC to swallow its pride and select West Virginia, Louisville, or South Florida, and leaving the Big 12 with 9 and the Big East with 6.

 

[Priceless]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

One has to wonder what this would do to the Big East even with a scenario involving the loss of only one league member (I'm sure the Big 12 is fine in this case). 7 teams is getting to the point where the other conferences might start to seriously reconsider their auto bid and its not like the Conference USA slate of replacements is going to get anyone excited. God forbid this sets off a round of conference raiding from the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 reshuffling.

The scenario where the SEC grabs say aTm and Clemson forcing the ACC to swallow its pride and select West Virginia, Louisville, or South Florida, and leaving the Big 12 with 9 and the Big East with 6.

I can see the Big East disappearing as the important teams from the conference get absorbed by the B10, ACC and SEC and the leftovers are left to fend for themselves (make a new, smaller conference/join the MAC/become Independent). By the time this is all done we could end up with four or five "super conferences" and then everyone else.

Hopefully it won't happen, but nothing would surprise me.

 

[Kepler]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

If notre dame accepts

Accepts what? I'm not aware there's even an offer (though I agree ND would almost certainly prefer to keep printing their own money).

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Accepts what? I'm not aware there's even an offer (though I agree ND would almost certainly prefer to keep printing their own money).

A big ten offer. Notre Dame makes less money than all of the teams in the big ten from TV by a wide margin. This is an established fact.

 

[Clifton]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I can see the Big East disappearing as the important teams from the conference get absorbed by the B10, ACC and SEC and the leftovers are left to fend for themselves (make a new, smaller conference/join the MAC/become Independent). By the time this is all done we could end up with four or five "super conferences" and then everyone else.

Hopefully it won't happen, but nothing would surprise me.

This is the ultimate end game that a lot of people are talking about. Four sixteen-team conferences, featuring most of the BCS core.

Now think about this: If the Missouri-Nebraska-Rutgers-Notre Dame story were to pan out over the long haul (not saying that it will or should, but it's definitely plausible), play a little game and try to shoehorn schools into the Pac Ten, SEC and ACC. Who should be worried? Off the top of my head, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor and Texas Tech could really feel the squeeze (although you'd think that Kansas' basketball reputation could buy them a bit of leverage). Cinci and Louisville also could have some issues, especailly if Texas and A&M were to consider moving to the SEC (and especially so if Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were to join them).

 

[Hammer]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Of those, I bet Kansas, K-State, Oklahoma, and OK State would get into the SEC to push them to 16 as well. Texas and Texas A&M would likely be a package deal where ever they went (my WAG is that their hands would be forced to the PAC 10 instead of the SEC), and it looks to me like Iowa State, Texas Tech and Baylor are likely the ones screwed in the whole deal. I have no idea where that leaves Colorado (PAC 10 maybe?).

Now, I fully acknowledge that wrecks the OU-Texas and OU-Nebraska rivalries, but there's not a whole lot we can do to avoid that if we're talking about expansion.

 

[Clifton]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Of those, I bet Kansas, K-State, Oklahoma, and OK State would get into the SEC to push them to 16 as well. Texas and Texas A&M would likely be a package deal where ever they went (my WAG is that their hands would be forced to the PAC 10 instead of the SEC), and it looks to me like Iowa State, Texas Tech and Baylor are likely the ones screwed in the whole deal.

Now, I fully acknowledge that wrecks the OU-Texas and OU-Nebraska rivalries, but there's not a whole lot we can do to avoid that if we're talking about expansion.

I think the real problems start if Texas, A&M and the two Oklahoma schools decide they want to stay together (Face it, Texas isn't going to be "forced" into anything; once the wheeling and dealing starts, the Longhorns are going to be drooled over). For the SEC to get all four of those schools would be an enormous coup (seriously, take a look at that conference strength!!!), and it would completely eliminate close up that conference in one swoop. You can assume that Colorado would have no problem but getting into the Pac Ten, but after that???

 

[Hammer]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I would think that if the four schools you mentioned wanted to be a package deal, they could still choose between the SEC and the PAC 10. If they choose the SEC, then there's a lot of schools in trouble in the middle. If they choose the PAC 10, then Kansas and Co. can work their way into the SEC without too much trouble. In that case, Colorado and Iowa State could be in trouble. If the Texas-Oklahoma quad goes to the PAC 10, Colorado needs a dancing partner to get the PAC 10 to 16. I don't see a way Iowa State doesn't get hurt here.

Someone's going to get squeezed here.

 

[Clifton]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I would think that if the four schools you mentioned wanted to be a package deal, they could still choose between the SEC and the PAC 10. If they choose the SEC, then there's a lot of schools in trouble in the middle. If they choose the PAC 10, then Kansas and Co. can work their way into the SEC without too much trouble. In that case, Colorado and Iowa State could be in trouble. If the Texas-Oklahoma quad goes to the PAC 10, Colorado needs a dancing partner to get the PAC 10 to 16. I don't see a way Iowa State doesn't get hurt here.

Someone's going to get squeezed here.

Not that Iowa State will make or break anything, but this point opens up another can of words that nobody is talking about: state politics. Remember that Virginia Tech wasn't part of the original Big East group to join the ACC, but they got squeezed in when the Virginia government raised **** about the Hokies being left behind. What if state of Iowa pressures Iowa (the school) to say no to expansion unless the Cyclones get the 16th spot? For that matter, what if state of Texas says that the Longhorns are a package deal with A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor(!!!)? Would the SEC seriously consider actually jettisoning, say South Carolina and Kentucky in exchange for the entire state of Texas? I doubt it, but I also doubt that nobody will consider this.

Forget about the BCS title game--the shenanigans over the summer that this goes down will be a once-in-a-lifetime pay-per-view event!

(And as far as Colorado goes, it's just a hunch, but I could see Utah coming along with Colorado in some scenarious, making the Utes one of the very few non-BCS schools that could actually benefit from this)

Oh yeah, and someone needs to become a "source" that can leak to a gullible radio station that a condition for joining the Big Ten is the existence or startup of a hockey program--just to make this Board a whole lot more exciting over the next few months

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

(And as far as Colorado goes, it's just a hunch, but I could see Utah coming along with Colorado in some scenarious, making the Utes one of the very few non-BCS schools that could actually benefit from this)

Iowa State could then join the Mountain West. Oh the irony, Iowa and Mountain in the same sentence.

 

[bronconick]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I think it's much more like that the SEC tries to grab some combination of Clemson, Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami before they offer Kansas.

I think there are 68 or so teams in BCS conferences, so there's a handful that are screwed if a 4 league 16 team setup is the ultimate result. Probably ISU, Baylor and a couple of the newer Big East teams that were CUSA a handful of years ago.

 

[GreatLakerMohawk]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Last month, the SU-centric blog Troy Nunes Is An Absolute Magician did a pretty bang-up piece on why the Big East won't exist in 2013 and it hits on every single bit of what's getting talked about here.

We've wondered for a while when the Era of the Superconferences would begin. Well, it's beginning now.

The only time someone broached the topic with Big East Commissioner John Marinatto, he quite literally said that he "doesn't want to talk about this." Well that's too bad, John, cause everyone else does. This isn't conjecture, it's actually happening. Very soon. And by not doing something, anything, you've already shown your hand. The Big East is ripe for the plucking and it's not going to put up much of a fight to stop you.

You need a simple reason to why Marinatto will do nothing? Here you go. He's a Providence guy. Nothing wrong with being a Providence guy...except in this instance. This is a football and "big picture" discussion. Providence is on the wrong side of that discussion. They're part of the small school, regional, traditional side of the Big East. The side that remembers when this was just all about basketball and nothing else. The side that cares so much about the history of the conference that it will do everything it can to maintain that. The side that only likes to think about the Big East in terms of how it was in the 80's. A Providence-centric guy is not going to sacrifice the old to make way for the new.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I think it's much more like that the SEC tries to grab some combination of Clemson, Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami before they offer Kansas.

I think there are 68 or so teams in BCS conferences, so there's a handful that are screwed if a 4 league 16 team setup is the ultimate result. Probably ISU, Baylor and a couple of the newer Big East teams that were CUSA a handful of years ago.

Only 65 actually plus Notre Dame whose hand would probably be forced in the super conference scenario. Of course if a 16 team Pac 10 would rather have Utah, Boise State (problems) and/or BYU (problems) than a Big 12 bottom feeder, the game of muscial chairs could be a lot more interesting.

A positive to the Super Conference scenario is that it makes the playoff argument a hell of a lot easier. 4 champions, 3 games.

 

[kingdobbs]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

One has to wonder what this would do to the Big East even with a scenario involving the loss of only one league member (I'm sure the Big 12 is fine in this case). 7 teams is getting to the point where the other conferences might start to seriously reconsider their auto bid and its not like the Conference USA slate of replacements is going to get anyone excited. God forbid this sets off a round of conference raiding from the SEC, ACC, and Big 12 reshuffling.

The Big East can probably weather the loss of one team to the Big Ten. Two, if one of them is Notre Dame.

If that one team is Notre Dame, they'll be pretty much fine. It also gives them the latitude (and the votes) to add that all-important ninth football school to the "hybrid" league (which, in this case, is most likely Memphis).

If the Big Ten goes to 14, it will probably take one or two (if not all three) from the Big East, which will be damaging and probably reduce the league to a second-tier status. If it is, based on who appears in the most rumors, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers, the league's pretty much CUSA-Northeast. They could grab ECU, Memphis and UCF to go back to 8, but I doubt that would help retain a BCS bid with just WVU in the "respected national programs" club. I doubt this triggers the "nightmare scenario" of a complete reshuffling of the leagues, however.

If the Big Ten goes to 16, though, all bets are off. At least three of the teams they grab will be Big East, and I would expect the ACC to make a play for at least some of the rest to protect themselves against the SEC. The SEC is probably more likely to go west and start poaching from the Big 12 (especially if the Big Ten and and Pac-10 start the ball rolling), but West Virginia, Clemson, Miami and FSU are attractive candidates for the SEC from the east coast.

 

[bigmrg74]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I think the real problems start if Texas, A&M and the two Oklahoma schools decide they want to stay together (Face it, Texas isn't going to be "forced" into anything; once the wheeling and dealing starts, the Longhorns are going to be drooled over). For the SEC to get all four of those schools would be an enormous coup (seriously, take a look at that conference strength!!!), and it would completely eliminate close up that conference in one swoop. You can assume that Colorado would have no problem but getting into the Pac Ten, but after that???

I think it's much more like that the SEC tries to grab some combination of Clemson, Georgia Tech, FSU and Miami before they offer Kansas.

I think there are 68 or so teams in BCS conferences, so there's a handful that are screwed if a 4 league 16 team setup is the ultimate result. Probably ISU, Baylor and a couple of the newer Big East teams that were CUSA a handful of years ago.

Yeah, I just really don't see the SEC going after Kansas, its just not Southern enough. If the SEC is going to go after anybody, its either going to be the Texas-Oklahoma combo from the Big Ten, or they're going to pick off 4 from the ACC. North Carolina could be in that mix as well. Miami is a Traditional football power, but they might not be able to tread water competing with the powerhouses of the SEC. They're a smaller private school, and the SEC is mostly large public schools. Thug U can only convince so many kids to stay home to play when there's other schools around that have it in there best interests to make sure they don't play there.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Only 65 actually plus Notre Dame whose hand would probably be forced in the super conference scenario. Of course if a 16 team Pac 10 would rather have Utah, Boise State (problems) and/or BYU (problems) than a Big 12 bottom feeder, the game of muscial chairs could be a lot more interesting.

A positive to the Super Conference scenario is that it makes the playoff argument a hell of a lot easier. 4 champions, 3 games.

I think expansion for the Pac Ten is more problematic than for the Big Ten or SEC, where there are a good number of nearby teams that could be snapped up. There just aren't a lot of other teams in the West that hold a lot of interest for the Pac. Utah and BYU(maybe) are ok, but adding the Utah market doesn't excite anybody. Colorado is a possibility, with maybe Utah as a travel partner. Other than that, slim pickings unless they reach even further east. But then you're getting a pretty disjointed conference.

 

[Priceless]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

What the conferences could look like when all is said and done.

ACC
Boston College
Clemson
Connecticut
Duke
Florida State
Georgia Tech
Louisville
Maryland
Miami (FL)
North Carolina
North Carolina State
Syracuse
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Wake Forest
West Virginia


Conference USA
East Carolina
Houston
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Marshall
Memphis
Rice
Southern Methodist
Southern Miss
Texas Tech
Tulane
Tulsa
UAB
UCF
UTEP


Pacific-16
Arizona
Arizona State
Boise State
California
Colorado
Colorado State
New Mexico
New Mexico State
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Utah
Washington
Washington State


Mountain West
Air Force
Brigham Young
Fresno State
Hawaii
Idaho
Nevada
San Diego State
San Jose State
TCU
UNLV
Utah State
Wyoming


Big 16
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Ohio State
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Rutgers
Wisconsin


Mid-American
Akron
Ball State
Bowling Green
Buffalo
Central Michigan
Cincinnati
Eastern Michigan
Kent State
Miami (OH)
Northern Illinois
Ohio
Temple
Toledo
Western Michigan


SEC
Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
LSU
Mississippi
Mississippi State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
Vanderbilt


Sun Belt
Arkansas State
Baylor
FIU
Florida Atlantic
Louisiana Tech
Louisiana-Lafayette
Louisiana-Monroe
Middle Tennessee
North Texas
South Florida
Troy
Western Kentucky

Each "major" conference is paired with a minor conference as those would be the natural rivals/punching bags for the major powers. Each conference has enough games for two divisions and a championship.

There could be some changes (Pitt instead of Syracuse, Utah instead of Colorado State, etc) but this could be the way things shake out.

The big losers are Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Cincinnati, Baylor, the Big East and Big 12 Conferences (which cease to exist) and fans who like things the way they are, or would like smaller tweaks. Of course, the TV money will be tremendous and the ratings will be high so the fan won't lose much.

 

[Clifton]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I'd be shocked if Cinci ended up in the MAC after all is said and done, but I'm sure that there will be a shock involving someone if things go down this road.

The more you look at this, the more you realize that Texas is going to be the key to everything. Texas' options are almost certainly going to be (1) go east to the SEC; (2) go west to the Pac 10 and (3) work with what's left of the Big Twelve to do some raiding of other conferences. If Texas chooses (1), I think the basics of your proposal are correct, although I'd wonder if the Pac Ten would decide to just pick Utah and Colorado and stick with twelve teams rather than grabbing some much lower schools for the sake of getting to sixteen.

If Texas chose option No. 2--going to the Pac Ten--the domino effect will make things look extremely different. In that scenario, I think Cinci becomes more attractive to the SEC, and the ACC may have to start worrying about some more of its own schools (Clemson, Georgia Tech). The end result could be much more of an ACC/Big East hybrid

If Texas really tries to keep the Big 12 afloat, well I have no ****** clue then

 

[French Rage]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Pacific-12
Arizona
Arizona State
Boise State
California
Colorado
Colorado State
New Mexico
New Mexico State
Oregon
Oregon State
Stanford
UCLA
USC
Utah
Washington
Washington State

Are you implying people on the west coast can't count?