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

[TexanMark]

Maryland adds the DMV as much as Rutgers brings Jersey. Very fertile recruiting area in many sports.

That too...The big boys want those NJ 4 and 5 star recruits

 

[SU94]

Wrong. See the math. You are assuming that any other teams added will be whales. If the SEC went to 24 it would be mainly programs worse than Auburn.

I am not talking 24 teams. That’s a pipe dream.

 

[mscanlo]

The SEC just voted down the 9 conference game schedule.

Teams cannot be “elite” if their records prove otherwise.

While some fans think they want better matchups, they will soon be tired of the beatdowns. Further, they will not draw new fans. See Rutgers. Losing teams lose fans and financial support.

It’s easy to think your team is the exception while wanting tougher schedules until the losing happens. Besides, the SEC has not proved its depth in post season play over time. At the top, yes, but after that, not impressive for what is alleged to be the best and deepest conference.

The middle and bottom of the SEC need four OOC games to fluff up their record because they cannot get enough wins in conference to prove they are mediocre, let alone elite. Besides, the big dogs in the SEC need their opponents to look respectable, otherwise they will be deemed to be beating up on 90lb weaklings, and rightfully so.

Now that the actual home/away opponents have come out, and after they go through a few seasons of it, I expect there to be discussions about going to 9 games, especially from UGA/Florida (which I believe were neutral and then voted against the 9 game)

As much as we think SEC fans are delusional sometimes, they are practical at the same time. They will likely have 3 teams (maybe 4?) in the 12 team playoffs. If their team is not in the top 3 (or 4), they will understand not getting in. I get your take about constant beatdowns, but the programs will then make changes

There will be some great opprotunities for fans to travel as well. For Georgia (I live in Georgia, so i've only lookede at their schedule, fans have an opportunity to go to any combination of games at Bryan-Denny (Alabama), Memorial Stadium (Texas) and The Grove (Ole Miss)... that's a pretty cool fan opportunity and I know a lot of people excited to at least get to one of those games. think how excited syracuse fans were to get to go to FSU or Clemson once a year

 

[sufandu]

Now that the actual home/away opponents have come out, and after they go through a few seasons of it, I expect there to be discussions about going to 9 games, especially from UGA/Florida (which I believe were neutral and then voted against the 9 game)

As much as we think SEC fans are delusional sometimes, they are practical at the same time. They will likely have 3 teams (maybe 4?) in the 12 team playoffs. If their team is not in the top 3 (or 4), they will understand not getting in. I get your take about constant beatdowns, but the programs will then make changes

There will be some great opprotunities for fans to travel as well. For Georgia (I live in Georgia, so i've only lookede at their schedule, fans have an opportunity to go to any combination of games at Bryan-Denny (Alabama), Memorial Stadium (Texas) and The Grove (Ole Miss)... that's a pretty cool fan opportunity and I know a lot of people excited to at least get to one of those games. think how excited syracuse fans were to get to go to FSU or Clemson once a year

Is your opinion about them being practical scewed by the fact that Georgia is at the top of the heep right now? I think it's the teams in the middle that will get shoved down a level that will throw fits.

 

[mscanlo]

Is your opinion about them being practical scewed by the fact that Georgia is at the top of the heep right now? I think it's the teams in the middle that will get shoved down a level that will throw fits.

No, my opinion is they will be quicker to do something about it (e.g. make a coaching change). I see it has there are 3 tiers. (3-4) Teams like make the playoffs, teams that make the bowl games, and the rest. Everyone has a different opinion on where they should be and will act accordingly.

Is it going to be harder to make the playoffs? No doubt. However, if you aren’t a top 3 (maybe 4) team in the SEC at the end of the regular season, do you really have an argument?

And for UGA, I think most fans hope, but realize, the SEC runs in 3-4 year cycles and then another power emerges (see Alabama,
auburn, Florida, etc), so they are enjoying it now.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Is your opinion about them being practical scewed by the fact that Georgia is at the top of the heep right now? I think it's the teams in the middle that will get shoved down a level that will throw fits.

There really isn't a middle in the SEC. You have the top half and the bottom half. When the top half programs are down, they will be in the middle. When the bottom half programs are up, they will be in the middle.

That is how things have always been. Programs go through ups and downs. So I don't see the need to really "adjust" to a new mindset.

The SEC West had A&M, Arkansas, Auburn, Bama, LSU, Ole Miss, Miss State the last 11 seasons and the fans didn't revolt. Going away from divisions will actually ease things for a few schools.

That being said, I do think the SEC could use a few more middle of the pack type of programs. Schools like Arizona State, BYU, NC State, VA Tech would keep the SEC strong but also allow the top teams a little more room to breath. Those schools won't make the SEC richer, but they should be able to get pro rata given that the SEC is adding 4 decent programs with decent following, 4 new states to the SEC footprint, three Top 30 TV markets, the Mountain time zone, and a few months in the Pacific time zone. The SEC probably could pull off one late Saturday night game per month.

Additionally they might be interested in adding a couple of cupcakes like Colorado and Kansas. Just having Vandy might not be enough, especially if you go to 9 conference games. Those two would add another 2 states, one Top 20 market, and a Top 5 BBall program. To offset the weaker FB programs they can add two good programs like Clemson and FSU. I would think that the networks would be fine giving those 4 schools the current going rate. Again doesn't make the SEC richer but it does bring competitive balance.

 

[Chris02M]

The middling and bottom of the SEC just like other P5 conferences need to go 3-1 or better in their OOC schedule to try to get to 6-6. One more conference game is nice in theory but the extra TV money can't change math.

Several SEC schools also have long standing OOC rivals which further complicates scheduling.

Jacksonville is scheduled to upgrade the Gator Bowl in a bid to extend the Cocktail Party game too. Both schools will look to schedule more home games to make up the loss of a home game every other year. I expect they'll (UGA and UF) offer more money to get some better branded OOC opponents but still buy wins. For example UConn vs ULM, SDSU vs Sam Houston St.
It wouldn't surprise me in 5 years to see a couple M3 schools pop up as a buy game.

SEC and B1G schools will all try for 8 game home schedules most years.

yes that is true but eventually it will move to 9 conference games especially when the sec adds more teams. the 8 game home schedule will be the old 7 game home schedule

 

[WoadBlue]

Do you think that simply because of all the travel required? If so, what do you think will hurt more, the time aspect or the expense?

They expense is an issue only for the non-revenue sports, but that is quite few teams. The time and wear and tear of travel will weigh on SC and UCLA teams.

Plus I don't think that that pair will deliver the TV numbers when playing anybody other than tOSU, Michigan, and maybe PSU that the BT needs to make a nice profit from the move. Nobody will give a flip about SC or UCLA vs. anybody else in the BT.

 

[HtownOrange]

Now that the actual home/away opponents have come out, and after they go through a few seasons of it, I expect there to be discussions about going to 9 games, especially from UGA/Florida (which I believe were neutral and then voted against the 9 game)

As much as we think SEC fans are delusional sometimes, they are practical at the same time. They will likely have 3 teams (maybe 4?) in the 12 team playoffs. If their team is not in the top 3 (or 4), they will understand not getting in. I get your take about constant beatdowns, but the programs will then make changes

There will be some great opprotunities for fans to travel as well. For Georgia (I live in Georgia, so i've only lookede at their schedule, fans have an opportunity to go to any combination of games at Bryan-Denny (Alabama), Memorial Stadium (Texas) and The Grove (Ole Miss)... that's a pretty cool fan opportunity and I know a lot of people excited to at least get to one of those games. think how excited syracuse fans were to get to go to FSU or Clemson once a year

I agree with the sentimental portions. However, sentiment does not pay the bills and satisfy the fans. Once the sentiment (new campuses, new experiences) is satisfied, reality will set in. Don't get me wrong, I was happy when we drew Clemson and FSU. Who we drew does not change the math of the percentage of winners and losers in conference games, it remains 50-50, and it sucks when you are on the losing side. Look what losing did to the SU fanbase.

 

[HtownOrange]

yes that is true but eventually it will move to 9 conference games especially when the sec adds more teams. the 8 game home schedule will be the old 7 game home schedule

Respectfully, how do you get 8 home games in the seasons you play 5 away games in conference? (Every other year in a 9-game conference schedule you have to play 4 home and 5 away games) Do you never play home/away series in OOC games?

If you refuse to play home/away games OOC, you have to buy all OOC games, for which the price will increase dramatically.

 

[W'boro'Cuse315]

 

[Chris02M]

The middling and bottom of the SEC just like other P5 conferences need to go 3-1 or better in their OOC schedule to try to get to 6-6. One more conference game is nice in theory but the extra TV money can't change math.

Several SEC schools also have long standing OOC rivals which further complicates scheduling.

Jacksonville is scheduled to upgrade the Gator Bowl in a bid to extend the Cocktail Party game too. Both schools will look to schedule more home games to make up the loss of a home game every other year. I expect they'll (UGA and UF) offer more money to get some better branded OOC opponents but still buy wins. For example UConn vs ULM, SDSU vs Sam Houston St.
It wouldn't surprise me in 5 years to see a couple M3 schools pop up as a buy game.

SEC and B1G schools will all try for 8 game home schedules most years.

they could also make the bowls like little league where everyone gets a trophy, or gets to go to a bowl game regardless of record

 

[Chris02M]

Respectfully, how do you get 8 home games in the seasons you play 5 away games in conference? (Every other year in a 9-game conference schedule you have to play 4 home and 5 away games) Do you never play home/away series in OOC games?

If you refuse to play home/away games OOC, you have to buy all OOC games, for which the price will increase dramatically.

buy games would increase

 

[kcsu]

Do you think that simply because of all the travel required? If so, what do you think will hurt more, the time aspect or the expense?

both

 

[UpstateSM]

UCLA and USC in the Big Ten is so nonsensical I still forget it’s a thing that is actually happening. I hate it.

 

[sufandu]

No, my opinion is they will be quicker to do something about it (e.g. make a coaching change). I see it has there are 3 tiers. (3-4) Teams like make the playoffs, teams that make the bowl games, and the rest. Everyone has a different opinion on where they should be and will act accordingly.

Is it going to be harder to make the playoffs? No doubt. However, if you aren’t a top 3 (maybe 4) team in the SEC at the end of the regular season, do you really have an argument?

And for UGA, I think most fans hope, but realize, the SEC runs in 3-4 year cycles and then another power emerges (see Alabama,
auburn, Florida, etc), so they are enjoying it now.

Doing something about it and successfully doing something about it are two different things. Changing coaches doesn't always lead to improvement. Someone will always be in the bottom.

 

[mscanlo]

Doing something about it and successfully doing something about it are two different things. Changing coaches doesn't always lead to improvement. Someone will always be in the bottom.

The 12 team playoff will also result in 18%-25% of the SEC likely making the playoffs vs. 8%-15% of the conference today, so more teams will have a “successful” season.

 

[mscanlo]

I agree with the sentimental portions. However, sentiment does not pay the bills and satisfy the fans. Once the sentiment (new campuses, new experiences) is satisfied, reality will set in. Don't get me wrong, I was happy when we drew Clemson and FSU. Who we drew does not change the math of the percentage of winners and losers in conference games, it remains 50-50, and it sucks when you are on the losing side. Look what losing did to the SU fanbase.

I don’t think you can use what losing did to the SU fan base to what potentially could happen at any of the SEC schools (outside of Vanderbilt and maybe Missouri?). Will losing consistently cause attendance to go down? Sure, likely only a little, especially on their weak OOC games.

I assume you don’t live in the south? I hate the slogan, but “it’s just different” is a true statement. The fans devote Saturday to football, regardless of how good their school is. There is no “raking leaves” alternative.

Heck, I think I’ve even hear from Auburn fans that they could go 1-11, but if that win is against Bama, it’s a good year

 

[HtownOrange]

I don’t think you can use what losing did to the SU fan base to what potentially could happen at any of the SEC schools (outside of Vanderbilt and maybe Missouri?). Will losing consistently cause attendance to go down? Sure, likely only a little, especially on their weak OOC games.

I assume you don’t live in the south? I hate the slogan, but “it’s just different” is a true statement. The fans devote Saturday to football, regardless of how good their school is. There is no “raking leaves” alternative.

Heck, I think I’ve even hear from Auburn fans that they could go 1-11, but if that win is against Bama, it’s a good year

I guess the Houston metro is not in the south, but it must be the “new” geography. None of the games I’ve attended at TAMU, OU, Baylor, Houston don’t give me any perspective. None of the season ticket holders, donors and big donors I’ve met have no viewpoints and just dump money into what they hope happens rather than demanding results. The UT and LSU fans I’ve worked with and met over the years just throw money to their schools regardless of results.

I understand football is a religion in Texas where I live. However, the flocks lose faith when they aren’t winning. I’ve attended games late in the season against big name teams with poor attendance because the fans expected a loss. And, yes, the games were sold out, people just don’t show. Sure, the diehards attend, but when multiple losing seasons occur, the fans and donors speak with their wallets And their feet.

Forgive my sarcasm, but you present anecdotal evidence the same as I do. I add in some facts. I’ve previously done the math to prove the point that nine big dogs cannot be champions year in and year out in a 16 team conference.

I watched how the big donors treat Mack Brown. I know the expectations for Jimbo Fisher, believe me, they are high! The monied donors are making their voices heard.

I do agree that a fanbase can handle a losing season due to injuries, coaching changes, etc., but that tolerance fails each consecutive year of less than stellar performance. SEC fans are delusional and when reality sets in, destroyed delusions cause more backlash, disappointment, and many fans will turn away. And yes, I understand some fans run on hatred of one team, I was stationed in Ohio, worked with many diehard, delusional tOSU fans in the John Cooper era, they were miserable with his ~ .100 win percentage against UM, as well as his similar bowl performance.

With nine big dogs in a 16 team conference, someone has to lose, others have to be mediocre. Think of the bell curve, the distribution over time will always fall in line with the curve. Nine big dogs will not be happy. Even with rotating powers, the fan bases will not be happy over time. Not less than six of the nine will be mediocre, one or two will be losers.

Sure, the four OOC games will lessen the general appearance, four cupcakes makes any team look good (see all past and present SU scheduling threads), but conference records will not lie. Bill Parcells said it best, “You are what your record says you are.” And if teams cannot win in conference they cannot get into the playoffs.

Everything will be fine for the first few years, but by year 7, 8, 9, we will see patterns develop and one-time powers reduced to rubble.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I guess the Houston metro is not in the south, but it must be the “new” geography. None of the games I’ve attended at TAMU, OU, Baylor, Houston don’t give me any perspective. None of the season ticket holders, donors and big donors I’ve met have no viewpoints and just dump money into what they hope happens rather than demanding results. The UT and LSU fans I’ve worked with and met over the years just throw money to their schools regardless of results.

I understand football is a religion in Texas where I live. However, the flocks lose faith when they aren’t winning. I’ve attended games late in the season against big name teams with poor attendance because the fans expected a loss. And, yes, the games were sold out, people just don’t show. Sure, the diehards attend, but when multiple losing seasons occur, the fans and donors speak with their wallets And their feet.

Forgive my sarcasm, but you present anecdotal evidence the same as I do. I add in some facts. I’ve previously done the math to prove the point that nine big dogs cannot be champions year in and year out in a 16 team conference.

I watched how the big donors treat Mack Brown. I know the expectations for Jimbo Fisher, believe me, they are high! The monied donors are making their voices heard.

I do agree that a fanbase can handle a losing season due to injuries, coaching changes, etc., but that tolerance fails each consecutive year of less than stellar performance. SEC fans are delusional and when reality sets in, destroyed delusions cause more backlash, disappointment, and many fans will turn away. And yes, I understand some fans run on hatred of one team, I was stationed in Ohio, worked with many diehard, delusional tOSU fans in the John Cooper era, they were miserable with his ~ .100 win percentage against UM, as well as his similar bowl performance.

With nine big dogs in a 16 team conference, someone has to lose, others have to be mediocre. Think of the bell curve, the distribution over time will always fall in line with the curve. Nine big dogs will not be happy. Even with rotating powers, the fan bases will not be happy over time. Not less than six of the nine will be mediocre, one or two will be losers.

Sure, the four OOC games will lessen the general appearance, four cupcakes makes any team look good (see all past and present SU scheduling threads), but conference records will not lie. Bill Parcells said it best, “You are what your record says you are.” And if teams cannot win in conference they cannot get into the playoffs.

Everything will be fine for the first few years, but by year 7, 8, 9, we will see patterns develop and one-time powers reduced to rubble.

The 9 teams are not playing each other every year. Having 8 other top programs is the same as being in a smaller conference with 4 other top programs. Over a 4 year period you will play 4 hard games per year and 16 total. It doesn't matter if those games are divided by 8 teams or 4 teams the difficulty is the same.

Yes, not everyone can be a conference champ but now with an expanded playoff that isn't as big of a deal. Over a 4 year period all 9 teams can make the playoffs at least once. It won't matter if they are 3rd in the SEC every year.

These teams will be fluctuating between 10-2 and 8-4. You act like they will be going 4-8. If teams are winning 8-10 games a year and making the playoffs 3/4 of the time, the fan base won't disappear.

 

[mscanlo]

I guess the Houston metro is not in the south, but it must be the “new” geography. None of the games I’ve attended at TAMU, OU, Baylor, Houston don’t give me any perspective. None of the season ticket holders, donors and big donors I’ve met have no viewpoints and just dump money into what they hope happens rather than demanding results. The UT and LSU fans I’ve worked with and met over the years just throw money to their schools regardless of results.

I understand football is a religion in Texas where I live. However, the flocks lose faith when they aren’t winning. I’ve attended games late in the season against big name teams with poor attendance because the fans expected a loss. And, yes, the games were sold out, people just don’t show. Sure, the diehards attend, but when multiple losing seasons occur, the fans and donors speak with their wallets And their feet.

Forgive my sarcasm, but you present anecdotal evidence the same as I do. I add in some facts. I’ve previously done the math to prove the point that nine big dogs cannot be champions year in and year out in a 16 team conference.

I watched how the big donors treat Mack Brown. I know the expectations for Jimbo Fisher, believe me, they are high! The monied donors are making their voices heard.

I don’t live in Texas, but I believe all of the Texas teams you have mentioned had down cycles recently. I imagine their fanbase survived those cycles.

As HRE mentions above, all the teams in the new SEC won't be terrible at once. The conference is very cyclical. There are probably 7/8 teams teams in the SEC who think they should win the conference title. All of them have competed for the conference (and even a national championship) in the past 20 years and all have also had bad seasons in that same time frame.

Unlike your perception (i assume biased towards SU), if it gets really bad for a while, the programs won't sit there and do nothing. Even in the ACC, FSU pulled a quick decision on Taggart (with the help of a very small group of boosters), Miami is stepping up with significant investment, etc.

Back to a Texas school (i looked this one out to make sure my memory was correct). Texas A&M fired Sumlin due to the downward trajectory after entering the SEC, despite his worst season of 7-6. Their fanbase seems back and louder than ever (based on media coverage)


Speaking of your reply to "football is a religion in Texas", that appears to actually be anecdotal. I think that saying is derived from Texas High School Football. NCAA Football is not the most popular sport in Texas (i know that might be hard to believe based on your said experience). NFL or MLB is, depending on source.

 

[javadoc]

Correct. The logic defeating the 9 game schedule will hold true the following season and into the future. The SEC needs OOC games to puff up the bottom and middle of the conference.

Carry the increased conference game schedule to only conference games. If they only want to play the elite teams and only the SEC is elite, why not? Because some has to lose to have a winner in a zero sum gain format.

Again, you cannot claim elite status with losing records or even middle of the pack records. This fact alone defeats the argument that all SEC teams are elite - remember, this is the basis of the argument for increased conference games.

If they want a conference akin to a pro league, they’re going to have to get used to 6-6 being a decent record. I wish there was some way to force them to play a larger in-conference schedule so they have to live with the consequences. I really hope people suffer for this idiocy.

Problem is that unlike a pro league, there is no easy path for relative shuffling. Without binding league-type rules/controls and access to talent thru a draft, the weaker teams are screwed.

 

[kcsu]

The 9 teams are not playing each other every year. Having 8 other top programs is the same as being in a smaller conference with 4 other top programs. Over a 4 year period you will play 4 hard games per year and 16 total. It doesn't matter if those games are divided by 8 teams or 4 teams the difficulty is the same.

Yes, not everyone can be a conference champ but now with an expanded playoff that isn't as big of a deal. Over a 4 year period all 9 teams can make the playoffs at least once. It won't matter if they are 3rd in the SEC every year.

These teams will be fluctuating between 10-2 and 8-4. You act like they will be going 4-8. If teams are winning 8-10 games a year and making the playoffs 3/4 of the time, the fan base won't disappear.

It doesn't work like that

 

[Hoo's That]

Do you think that simply because of all the travel required? If so, what do you think will hurt more, the time aspect or the expense?

IMO, the time for non-football teams. For example, USC plays WLax. Each year they will most probably have 3 games in the Eastern time zone. I can see the schedule's being split into H-A pairings for them as OSU-Michigan, PSU-Rutgers, and Maryland-Hopkins, with Northwestern thrown in with one or the other group. All of the B1G plays softball, but that means USC and UCLA will each have one literal coast-to-coast trip each year when they play Rutgers or Maryland (flying from LAX to Newark or Dulles). They do pick up more games in the Central time zone, though.

 

[Hoo's That]

If they want a conference akin to a pro league, they’re going to have to get used to 6-6 being a decent record. I wish there was some way to force them to play a larger in-conference schedule so they have to live with the consequences. I really hope people suffer for this idiocy.

Problem is that unlike a pro league, there is no easy path for relative shuffling. Without binding league-type rules/controls and access to talent thru a draft, the weaker teams are screwed.

The example I keep citing is which Week 10 game will people be more likely to watch - 2-7 Alabama v. 3-6 Texas or 9-0 SU v. 8-1 Ga Tech?