ACC, PAC-12, and BIG alliance / conference realignment

[DoctorBombay]

IMO everything would need to break right for the ACC to stay #3. The B12 is better positioned to be #3. If the ACC survives (if SU gets left behind I hope it does), it will more likely be the MWC of the East.

I think the ACC has a better than even chance to be #3, mostly due to the GOR. Most people have derided it but let's be honest, without the GOR the ACC would've been long gone. What we do know is that the ACC is here in it's present form for at least another decade, and in that time while the Big12/PAC are trying to stay afloat, the known commodity is still the ACC.
Putting aside the delusions of grandeur of the so-called Magnificent 7, if the ACC can stick it out as the clear #3, we should be in a good place come 2033 or so. And definitely in much better position than a watered down Big 12/PAC.

 

[Chip]

“There's at least a decent chance that the only main conferences across college sports in 2026 will be the ACC, SEC, and Big Ten.”

https://thespun.com/more/top-stories/paul-finebaum-predicts-major-conference-will-collapse-by-2026

Did you reply to them with 4X16?

 

[HtownOrange]

I think the ACC has a better than even chance to be #3, mostly due to the GOR. Most people have derided it but let's be honest, without the GOR the ACC would've been long gone. What we do know is that the ACC is here in it's present form for at least another decade, and in that time while the Big12/PAC are trying to stay afloat, the known commodity is still the ACC.
Putting aside the delusions of grandeur of the so-called Magnificent 7, if the ACC can stick it out as the clear #3, we should be in a good place come 2033 or so. And definitely in much better position than a watered down Big 12/PAC.

Add to that the fact that the big names in the SEC and B1G won't all remain top dogs because there are not enough conference wins available. Some may become losers. And that will not bode well for their fanbases.

Right now the GOR allows the ACC to grab popcorn and watch the drama unfold. At least for a decade.

 

[ECE '76]

Add to that the fact that the big names in the SEC and B1G won't all remain top dogs because there are not enough conference wins available. Some may become losers.

I think it's called "Nebraska Syndrome".

 

[Cuse'91]

Add to that the fact that the big names in the SEC and B1G won't all remain top dogs because there are not enough conference wins available. Some may become losers. And that will not bode well for their fanbases.

Right now the GOR allows the ACC to grab popcorn and watch the drama unfold. At least for a decade.

For the never beens, nothing really changes; beat up on non-conference punching bags, and get to a minor bowl. For the once beens, career tracks will be similar to the Tennessee Vols; return to dominance, spaced between years and years of Conference mediocrity.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

The big 12 is only better positioned because all the schools have value for big10 and sec have already taken them so they have nothing left

Exactly. The ACC is better positioned for the next 10 years. But the next 25+ years the B12 is more likely to still exist or have more value than a left over ACC.

Either way there will be a P2, G5, and whatever if left from the ACC, B12, and P10. There will not be 3 mains.

 

[kcsu]

Add to that the fact that the big names in the SEC and B1G won't all remain top dogs because there are not enough conference wins available. Some may become losers. And that will not bode well for their fanbases.

Right now the GOR allows the ACC to grab popcorn and watch the drama unfold. At least for a decade.

Something about a Turtle and Hare...

 

[HtownOrange]

Exactly. The ACC is better positioned for the next 10 years. But the next 25+ years the B12 is more likely to still exist or have more value than a left over ACC.

Either way there will be a P2, G5, and whatever if left from the ACC, B12, and P10. There will not be 3 mains.

I am not sure it will take 25 years to resolve several issues. We know that the winners/losers ratio remains the same, it will always be a zero sum gain.

With the B1G and SEC trying to support so many big names, their balance of power will have to shift several to mediocrity or loser status. The shift will likely cause a loss in fan support and big dollar donors.

Think of it like economics, the larger the middle class, the stronger the economy. The B1G and SEC cannot have all the power schools on top. The conferences will need to grow to accommodate the power schools or the conferences will break up to keep the big names in business.

If you prefer, think of it as the bell curve. The champion is on the right, the worst team on the left with the masses in the middle.

While most teams can take a hit for a year or two, when fans see their team perpetually behind the proverbial eight ball, they will lose interest. Something will have to give.

Is the GOR sufficiently long enough to ride out the shift or not? I think it is when you have so many arrogant big dogs in two conferences. Some will be exposed as terriers and Chihuahuas as opposed the their historical perception as German shepherd and retrievers.

Just another fan's opinion.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I am not sure it will take 25 years to resolve several issues. We know that the winners/losers ratio remains the same, it will always be a zero sum gain.

With the B1G and SEC trying to support so many big names, their balance of power will have to shift several to mediocrity or loser status. The shift will likely cause a loss in fan support and big dollar donors.

Think of it like economics, the larger the middle class, the stronger the economy. The B1G and SEC cannot have all the power schools on top. The conferences will need to grow to accommodate the power schools or the conferences will break up to keep the big names in business.

If you prefer, think of it as the bell curve. The champion is on the right, the worst team on the left with the masses in the middle.

While most teams can take a hit for a year or two, when fans see their team perpetually behind the proverbial eight ball, they will lose interest. Something will have to give.

Is the GOR sufficiently long enough to ride out the shift or not? I think it is when you have so many arrogant big dogs in two conferences. Some will be exposed as terriers and Chihuahuas as opposed the their historical perception as German shepherd and retrievers.

Just another fan's opinion.

Both conferences are at about 50% small. So there are plenty of wins for the big teams. The SEC is more top heavy and could really use schools like VA Tech and NC State, more so than FSU and Clemson. The B16 could easily take Notre Dame and Miami without having too many top programs. And if they add UVA, UNC, and GA Tech then all the better.

Also you need to remember these top teams usually have one big OOC game. You no longer have a need for those OOC games if your conference is multi-region and has plenty of top teams. Both the B16 and SEC can go to 10 conference games and not have to worry about OOC games. They can buy two G5 home cupcakes and call it a day. If you are a top team you can play a national schedule with 3 tough games a year and 9 games that you shouldn't have to worry about. Even if you lose your 3 hard games, you should be in the playoff hunt given Ws vs the teams you should beat.

Big
B16 (5): Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, USC
SEC (7): Bama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma

Medium
B16 (4): Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State, UCLA
SEC (2): Auburn, A&M

Small
B16 (7): Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota
SEC (7): Kentucky, Vandy, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Miss State, Arkansas, Mizzou

 

[TexanMark]

If there are 3 nd only 3 that are truly Major, then the ACC as the 3rd in terms of money and power must have a rather tight alliance of some type with whatever is left of the Pac or with the Big 12.

But the mass of TV offering will keep it in the game.

Long term some in the megaACC will elevate their brands

 

[DoctorBombay]

Something about a Turtle and Hare...

This^^^
Movement is good. Change can also be good- except when it's change for change's sake, w/ no plan behind it.
The Big12/PAC are moving because they absolutely have to, but honestly, where are the valuable programs gonna go? The PAC has more than the Big12 imo, but neither one seems to have a clear idea what to do.
Meanwhile, the ACC can chill in the cut, maneuver behind the scenes, and still come out smelling like roses. Sometimes the best move, is no move at all...not that the conference has much choice. But rather than it being detrimental, I think its an asset. JMHO

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I could see 3 major conferences of 24 schools. I think the below makes sense for the SEC and B16. It makes them national without diluting the product. The ACC, B12, and P10 merge into a third national conference.

With 6 divisions you can easily schedule 9-10 FB games where you play everyone once in 4 years and 20 BBall games where you play everyone once home and once away every 4 years. A perm cross over rival or two keeps everyone happy.

Big Ten
USC, Washington, UCLA, Stanford
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minny
Michigan, Sparty, Illinois, Northwestern
Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Indiana
Notre Dame, Pitt, Maryland, Rutgers
Miami, GA Tech, UNC, UVA

SEC
A&M, BYU, ASU, Colorado
Texas, Oklahoma, Mizzou, Kansas
LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State
Bama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vandy
Florida, UGA, Auburn, South Carolina
FSU, Clemson, VA Tech, NC State

ACC/B12/P10
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State, Cal
Okie State, K State, Utah, Zona
Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston
Louisville, Iowa State, Cincy, Memphis
SU, BC, Wake, Duke
WV, UCF, USF, UConn

 

[BlazeOrange]

I could see 3 major conferences of 24 schools...

How would you set up a national championship playoff with 3 champions standing above the others?

Could you integrate a 4-team conference playoff into the structure?

Maybe 8 team NC playoff with AQ to regular season and conference tournament winners. Rest of field (which could be between 2 and 5 teams) selected by seeding committee.

 

[texascpa]

How would you set up a national championship playoff with 3 champions standing above the others?

Could you integrate a 4-team conference playoff into the structure?

Maybe 8 team NC playoff with AQ to regular season and conference tournament winners. Rest of field (which could be between 2 and 5 teams) selected by seeding committee.

It would still be 12-teams. No way they would scale back. 4 from each conference, or 3 from each and 3 others from Notre Dame (Notre Dame will still be independent) and G6.

 

[longtimefan]

It would still be 12-teams. No way they would scale back. 4 from each conference, or 3 from each and 3 others from Notre Dame (Notre Dame will still be independent) and G6.

Except, both SEC and B1G will want more than 4 teams in the tournament--which they will have on occasion in the new 12-team tourney.

 

[texascpa]

Except, both SEC and B1G will want more than 4 teams in the tournament--which they will have on occasion in the new 12-team tourney.

I would be surprised if, in the current state, either of those conferences had 4 or more in the 12 team playoff. Looking at last year's rankings, each conference had 3 teams each in the Top 15. But in a new 3 major conference structure, I suppose that's a possibility.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

How would you set up a national championship playoff with 3 champions standing above the others?

Could you integrate a 4-team conference playoff into the structure?

Maybe 8 team NC playoff with AQ to regular season and conference tournament winners. Rest of field (which could be between 2 and 5 teams) selected by seeding committee.

The 2 best division champs would play in the conference CG.

Those 3 x 24 wouldn't happen for like a dozen years. By then there likely will be more playoff teams than 12. But let's assume it is still 12.

Right now 6 of 10 conf champs get in (P5 + best G5). If we are down to 8 conferences then they can push for 4 of 8 (P3 + best G5). That is the same access for the G5 and adds 2 more at larges. Or at the very least 5 of 8 (P3 + 2 G5) which is more access for the G5 and one more at large.

Or you can have 7 team conference tournaments and reduce the CFB Playoffs to 4 teams. So instead of just the B16 CG they have QFs, SFs, and a CG. The playoffs are the 3 best conf champs (likely B16, SEC, and ABP) plus one at large (2nd team from one of those 3 or a G5). Be able to sell 5 conference playoff games keeps the money in your conference. In the 12 team playoff you do not know how many slots you will end up with.

So something like...

Big Ten
QF
Penn State at Notre Dame
Minny at USC
UNC at Ohio State
SF
Penn State at Michigan
Ohio State at USC
CG
Ohio State vs Michigan

SEC
QF
Tenn at LSU
BYU at Bama
Texas at Clemson
SF
LSU at UGA
Clemson at Bama
CG
Bama vs UGA

ACC/B12/P10
QF
Utah at UCF
Duke at K State
Cincy at Oregon State
SF
Utah at TCU
Oregon State at K State
CG
K State vs TCU

Playoffs
SF
Michigan vs UGA
K State vs Ohio State
CG
Ohio State vs UGA



Edit

Or you can have the playoffs be 5 teams. The P3, an at large, and the G5 tourny champ. While the P3 are having their conference tournaments, the G5 winners can play in a playoff to get into the national playoffs.

So...

QFs
Toledo at WKU
SFs
WKU at Tulane
Fresno State at Troy
Final
Fresno State at Tulane

Playoffs
QF
Michigan at Tulane

 

[HtownOrange]

Both conferences are at about 50% small. So there are plenty of wins for the big teams. The SEC is more top heavy and could really use schools like VA Tech and NC State, more so than FSU and Clemson. The B16 could easily take Notre Dame and Miami without having too many top programs. And if they add UVA, UNC, and GA Tech then all the better.

Also you need to remember these top teams usually have one big OOC game. You no longer have a need for those OOC games if your conference is multi-region and has plenty of top teams. Both the B16 and SEC can go to 10 conference games and not have to worry about OOC games. They can buy two G5 home cupcakes and call it a day. If you are a top team you can play a national schedule with 3 tough games a year and 9 games that you shouldn't have to worry about. Even if you lose your 3 hard games, you should be in the playoff hunt given Ws vs the teams you should beat.

Big
B16 (5): Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Nebraska, USC
SEC (7): Bama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, LSU, Texas, Oklahoma

Medium
B16 (4): Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State, UCLA
SEC (2): Auburn, A&M

Small
B16 (7): Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota
SEC (7): Kentucky, Vandy, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Miss State, Arkansas, Mizzou

The B1G and SEC did the math, as should you. More conference games works against the big name schools. Bama fought hard for four OOC games as the SEC needs everyone to win their four games so the conference looks better.

Wins and losses in conference play will always equal each other. For each win the SEC champ possesses, another SEC team must have a loss. Assuming eight teams can run the table, the remaining eight will have zero conference wins. Assume every SEC team wins their respective OOC games, the SEC would have eight teams with 12 wins and eight with four wins. Obviously, this schedule would be a joke and is virtually impossible. However, if you evenly distribute the wins, you get the picture. The picture gets worse with none or 10 conference games. Again, this assumes each SEC teams wins every OOC game. The numbers are worse if the don't, and they won't.

Now pick which big names will be happy being relegated to mediocrity or worse. Fans will not follow a mediocre team in the same numbers as perpetual contenders.

Repeat for the B1G.

 

[sufandu]

I could see 3 major conferences of 24 schools. I think the below makes sense for the SEC and B16. It makes them national without diluting the product. The ACC, B12, and P10 merge into a third national conference.

With 6 divisions you can easily schedule 9-10 FB games where you play everyone once in 4 years and 20 BBall games where you play everyone once home and once away every 4 years. A perm cross over rival or two keeps everyone happy.

Big Ten
USC, Washington, UCLA, Stanford
Nebraska, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minny
Michigan, Sparty, Illinois, Northwestern
Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Indiana
Notre Dame, Pitt, Maryland, Rutgers
Miami, GA Tech, UNC, UVA

SEC
A&M, BYU, ASU, Colorado
Texas, Oklahoma, Mizzou, Kansas
LSU, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss State
Bama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Vandy
Florida, UGA, Auburn, South Carolina
FSU, Clemson, VA Tech, NC State

ACC/B12/P10
Oregon, Oregon State, Washington State, Cal
Okie State, K State, Utah, Zona
Texas Tech, TCU, Baylor, Houston
Louisville, Iowa State, Cincy, Memphis
SU, BC, Wake, Duke
WV, UCF, USF, UConn

That looks like a one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the others situation. I don't think the bottom one would be considered a major conference by anyone outside of that conference. It feels very AAC. So really, there would be two major conferences made up 48 teams.

 

[kcsu]

The 2 best division champs would play in the conference CG.

Those 3 x 24 wouldn't happen for like a dozen years. By then there likely will be more playoff teams than 12. But let's assume it is still 12.

Right now 6 of 10 conf champs get in (P5 + best G5). If we are down to 8 conferences then they can push for 4 of 8 (P3 + best G5). That is the same access for the G5 and adds 2 more at larges. Or at the very least 5 of 8 (P3 + 2 G5) which is more access for the G5 and one more at large.

Or you can have 7 team conference tournaments and reduce the CFB Playoffs to 4 teams. So instead of just the B16 CG they have QFs, SFs, and a CG. The playoffs are the 3 best conf champs (likely B16, SEC, and ABP) plus one at large (2nd team from one of those 3 or a G5). Be able to sell 5 conference playoff games keeps the money in your conference. In the 12 team playoff you do not know how many slots you will end up with.

So something like...

Big Ten
QF
Penn State at Notre Dame
Minny at USC
UNC at Ohio State
SF
Penn State at Michigan
Ohio State at USC
CG
Ohio State vs Michigan

SEC
QF
Tenn at LSU
BYU at Bama
Texas at Clemson
SF
LSU at UGA
Clemson at Bama
CG
Bama vs UGA

ACC/B12/P10
QF
Utah at UCF
Duke at K State
Cincy at Oregon State
SF
Utah at TCU
Oregon State at K State
CG
K State vs TCU

Playoffs
SF
Michigan vs UGA
K State vs Ohio State
CG
Ohio State vs UGA



Edit

Or you can have the playoffs be 5 teams. The P3, an at large, and the G5 tourny champ. While the P3 are having their conference tournaments, the G5 winners can play in a playoff to get into the national playoffs.

So...

QFs
Toledo at WKU
SFs
WKU at Tulane
Fresno State at Troy
Final
Fresno State at Tulane

Playoffs
QF
Michigan at Tulane

Cali
..cali is that you

 

[HRE Otto IV]

The B1G and SEC did the math, as should you. More conference games works against the big name schools. Bama fought hard for four OOC games as the SEC needs everyone to win their four games so the conference looks better.

Wins and losses in conference play will always equal each other. For each win the SEC champ possesses, another SEC team must have a loss. Assuming eight teams can run the table, the remaining eight will have zero conference wins. Assume every SEC team wins their respective OOC games, the SEC would have eight teams with 12 wins and eight with four wins. Obviously, this schedule would be a joke and is virtually impossible. However, if you evenly distribute the wins, you get the picture. The picture gets worse with none or 10 conference games. Again, this assumes each SEC teams wins every OOC game. The numbers are worse if the don't, and they won't.

Now pick which big names will be happy being relegated to mediocrity or worse. Fans will not follow a mediocre team in the same numbers as perpetual contenders.

Repeat for the B1G.

You are not following the math at all. The bigger the conference goes the less the big name teams have to play. Is Bama not better off playing Texas once in four year vs every other year?


Edit

This would be a typical Bama 4 year stretch:

Year 1: LSU, Florida, Tennessee, Auburn, BYU, Kentucky, NC State, Mizzou, Vandy, Houston, UAB, Tulsa

Year 2: LSU, Texas, Tennessee, Auburn, Arkansas, Kentucky, VA Tech, Colorado, Vandy, Houston, Jacksonville State, LA Tech

Year 3: UGA, A&M, Tennessee, Auburn, Clemson, Kentucky, Ole Miss, Kansas, Vandy, Memphis, Middle Tennessee, Western Kentucky

Year 4: Oklahoma, FSU, Tennessee, Auburn, South Carolina, Kentucky, Miss State, Vandy, Memphis, Arkansas State, Troy

This would be a typical Ohio State 4 year stretch:

Year 1: Michigan, Penn State, Notre Dame, Iowa, GA Tech, Purdue, Illinois, Stanford, Indiana, Duke, Toledo, Marshall

Year 2: Michigan, Penn State, USC, Mich State, Purdue, Minn, Pitt, UNC, Indiana, Duke, Bowling Green, ODU

Year 3: Michigan, Penn State, Nebraska, Washington, Purdue, UVA, Maryland, Illinois, Indiana, USF, Akron, Southern Miss

Year 4: Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Miami, UCLA, Purdue, Northwestern, Rutgers, Indiana, Kent State, James Madison

Both teams are easily getting 10 Ws and making the playoffs vs those schedules. And it is actually easier than the current schedules they play. Although I made the assumption that FCS games will eventually go away. That might not be the case. Also I made the assumption that both the B16 and SEC will require 10 power games total. If it is only 9 then you can replace those OOC ACC/B12/P10 games with G5s or FCSs.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

That looks like a one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the others situation. I don't think the bottom one would be considered a major conference by anyone outside of that conference. It feels very AAC. So really, there would be two major conferences made up 48 teams.

Agree. The B16 and SEC would be well ahead of the ACC/B12/P10, but that conference would also be well ahead of the G5. If you want to call it the Big 2, Medium 1, and Little 5 go ahead.

 

[sufandu]

Agree. The B16 and SEC would be well ahead of the ACC/B12/P10, but that conference would also be well ahead of the G5. If you want to call it the Big 2, Medium 1, and Little 5 go ahead.

I don't know what I would call it. I think everyone that matters would put it much closer to the G5 than the power 2. I guess if something like that transpired, we'd have to see the kind of TV/streaming contract it would draw. That's pretty much what determines it anyway.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I don't know what I would call it. I think everyone that matters would put it much closer to the G5 than the power 2. I guess if something like that transpired, we'd have to see the kind of TV/streaming contract it would draw. That's pretty much what determines it anyway.

That conference would still have a 4 year avg attendance of 39,934 per game. That would be significantly higher than the G5 conferences. The only G5 schools that have a 4 year avg above 30k would be: ECU, Fresno State, Boise State, Navy, San Diego State. And everyone of those would be more than 4k below the ACC/B12/P10 avg. It would be much better than the old AAC, but very far away from the B16 and SEC.

 

[Chip]

If the ACC and Pac-whatever merge up, this should be their conference logo.