B1G Expansion and more Conference Realignment

[WoodyHayes1951]

But will this collection of Nomads still get that BCS bid for next year?

[LouisianaHuskerFan]

So if the Big East is kicking everyone out except for the Catholic 7 and are adding Xavier, Creighton and Butler what is happening to Rutgers, Louisville,UConn,Cincy and USF for the 2013 season?

 

They already have their football schedules set so the easiest thing to do would be to just play the season out. Don't forget that Memphis, UCF, Houston & SMU are also set to start play in the *leftovers conference this year. Of course they'll have to rewrite the schedules for every other sport, but that shouldn't be an impossible hurdle.

 

*Former Big East

 

The Big East will remain the Big East as we know it right now through the 2013 season. Then in 2014 the Big East name will go to the catholic 7 teams with the Big East football teams having a new conference name.

According to the news that came out yesterday the timetable has been moved up & the 'new' Big East (C7 + X & Butler) will start play this upcoming season (2013-2014). Apparently Fox pushed to get it done.

 

 

But the Big East name will remain with the football schools until after the 2013 season.

[Omaha-Husker]

So if the Big East is kicking everyone out except for the Catholic 7 and are adding Xavier, Creighton and Butler what is happening to Rutgers, Louisville,UConn,Cincy and USF for the 2013 season?

 

They already have their football schedules set so the easiest thing to do would be to just play the season out. Don't forget that Memphis, UCF, Houston & SMU are also set to start play in the *leftovers conference this year. Of course they'll have to rewrite the schedules for every other sport, but that shouldn't be an impossible hurdle.

 

*Former Big East

 

The Big East will remain the Big East as we know it right now through the 2013 season. Then in 2014 the Big East name will go to the catholic 7 teams with the Big East football teams having a new conference name.

According to the news that came out yesterday the timetable has been moved up & the 'new' Big East (C7 + X & Butler) will start play this upcoming season (2013-2014). Apparently Fox pushed to get it done.

 

 

But the Big East name will remain with the football schools until after the 2013 season.

 

No it wont. Their BCS auto bid will though.

[Kiyoat Husker]

...Taking UVA off the table since they submitted their paperwork...

Hadn't heard this part. Would be a great addition in my book. Hopefully would fuel getting NC.

[WoodyHayes1951]

...Taking UVA off the table since they submitted their paperwork...

Hadn't heard this part. Would be a great addition in my book. Hopefully would fuel getting NC.

 

 

 

Yeah they sent to the Big Ten their plan on how to transition from the ACC to the Big Ten.

 

UNC doesn't want to be responsible for the destruction of the ACC. They should be setting it up so the hatred is geared towards the Big Ten ,Maryland and UVA. Think that would be best.

[Muck]

No it wont. Their BCS auto bid will though.

 

That's what I think will happen as well. The Big East name going with the C7 is apparently already a done deal. I'm sure the BCS bid going with the FB schools is part of the package (what value does it have to the C7?) and the NCAA/Media partners will probably just let it ride for a year because it's good PR if nothing else.

[Kiyoat Husker]

I think that trying to use competitive balance as a criteria for divisions is a fool's errand. Maybe it could be important for the top 2 or 4 schools, but aside from that we should have used geography and rivalries as primary factors. dominance or futility in football is in constant flux, and has been affected by many factors in the last 10 or 20 years. Wisconsin and Kansas State were doormats for most of thier existence, but both have had periods of excellence recently. Miami "appeared" out of nowhere in the early eighties, but now is considered a football blueblood. It is too hard to predict the future to make bizarre arrangements based on competitive balance. I think Wisconsin belongs in the western group no matter how you slice it. And Michigan and Ohio State should be in the same division.

 

I'm somewhat split when it comes to competitive balance. When Nebraska first joined and we were talking about divisions I started looking into the historical performance of teams. It soon became apparently that most teams tend to have a general level of success that they don't deviate from over the long term. While there may be some highs & lows the majority of schools tend to

 

There have actually only been a very small number of schools that have bootstrapped themselves to the next level of performance for a sustained period....the Wisconsins, Northwesterns, Kansas States, Virginia Techs, Oregons & Miamis are actually the exception rather than the norm.

 

To be honest what I found to be the best way to determine a team likely to have sustained success was to look at FB spending by the athletic department. There is a very correlation between the two. There is also a lot of inertia involved with FB success; good teams tend to stay good while bad teams tend to stay bad.

 

Another aspect of 'competitive balance' that gets overlooked is that equal access to the more successfull/brand name teams is beneficial to those who don't typically enjoy much success. The general consensus is that Ohio State, TSUN & PSU will all end up in the east and over the long run it's possible that will actually hurt some of the western teams. It means Minnesota & Illinois won't be on national TV quite as often & that attendance may sag with only a single marquee team (Nebraska) in their division.

 

So yeah I agree that 'competitive balance' isn't something that can be absolutely planned in advance there is a level that can (and should) be taken into account when planning long term divisions.

 

Thanks for the clarification. I chose to put Pitt and UVA in the EC division mostly based on geography, but you could easily swap Penn State and Virginia. in fact, that might actually be a more appealing option. I just thought it would be little strange to have a division made up entirely of B1G newcomers (Rutgers, Maryland, UVA, Duke, UNC). In regards to competitive balance, that's the beauty of my rotating system - it helps ensure that no one division ever becomes too dominant, while also keeping intact many of the important geographical rivalries.

 

 

Thanks, got it!

I agree with a lot of what you are saying, and you made your points eloquently, but my view is that college football is a completely different animal today than it was just 20 years ago. Kids are not going to just go to Michigan because it is "MICHIGAN!". The 85 schollie rules, and the escalating popularity of the sport, and recruiting have leveled the playing field in many ways. Top recruiting targets no longer wish to ride the bench for 3 years at one of a handful of elite schools. They simply transfer as if it were free agency. As a result, the elite schools no longer have an exhaustive bench of talent, and injuries can be devastating to your season. Money and facilities have escalated in response to this recruiting game. Again we have the split between haves and have-nots based on budget and access to talent, but it is not always the same line-up of schools in the "have" group. In effect I am agreeing with Woody's egotistical new coach, and saying that if the B1G wants to remain relevant we need to invest heavily in the new recruiting game and rest less on our "legends and leaders" laurels.

 

The example of Wisconsin is interesting, because of the time-frame used by the B1G brass to evaluate "competitive balance". I believe they looked at only the years since PSU joined the league in the early nineties. Wisconsin's record over that time was great. Enough to put it in the second tier of B1G schools behind OSU, Mich, Nebraska and PSU. I agree that KSU and Wisconsin are anomalies in that they had a long consistent streak of losing for around a hundred years. Alvarez and Snyder were really incredible coaches that overcame the odds, and redefined success at their schools. Is this success sustainable? I'm not sure. KSU is likely to take another nose dive post-Snyder. They just don't have the tradition, facilities, fan base, money, or easy access to top recruits to sustain what Snyder has done. Wisconsin's future isn't guaranteed either. While their fan base is large and passionate, it is really hard to recruit to Wisconsin. They could be in for a sustained drought.

 

But whether or not they are dominant, the rivalry with Minnesota will always be there, and will always be important to the fans. That is why I think it was silly to split them. Same with OSU-Michigan.

[gratefullred]

Rumors have slowed, so I find myself going over these rumors in my head to make some sense of it all. We know the result of Maryland vs the ACC have a huge impact on any ACC members leaving for the B1G, but if this is favorable for Maryland.

 

I hear enough rumors that make me think UVA is #15, but haven't heard enough to make me think UNC is #16. I have been trolling these schools message boards and both schools are against any move from the ACC barring all out armagedon.

 

I think GaTech and FSU are ready to go at #17 & #18. I must disclose I really want FSU. Here is the problem, If UNC is not moving what does the B1G do? UVA and FSU would leave FSU as a geographic outlier, which seems to be working well for WVA and the BigXII? Would they choose a combination of UVA and GaTech, which would again lower the level of competion?

 

Now lets assume the B1G brings in all 4, who is 19 and 20? I would go with ND and BC, and if ND wont move again I would go with Mizzou and Vandy. I guess I bring this up after looking at the poll put up by IA State Huskr where there was a lot of support for Kansas. I just don't get it, sure NU vs KU went on for a very long time, but what was so compelling about it? Once in a while their bad football team beat NU, and once in a while NU's bad basketball team beat KU. I enjoyed the Mizzou rivalry much more, even when Mizzou was down playing at their place was never easy.

 

I have a modest understanding of markets, and realize the brand that is KU basketball but could that deliver anything more than KC? Where Mizzou has the potential to deliver KC and StL. Haven't looked into the B1G Network carriage in StL, they may already have it.

 

I guess I really don't want any Big8 teams moving with NU to the B1G. After all they are the ones who let TX run the BigXII. I wouldn't mind seeing them rot on the vine.

[Kiyoat Husker]

I also have looked at ACC message boards to garner fan opinion. Agree that most of them would prefer to stay in the conference, especially NC. There are obvious reasons, from rivalries to historical/sentimental, to travel concerns. Those that want to go to the B1G mostly just cite money and stability, or an extreme dislike for the "uneducated" SEC. So I guess that would be the "lesser of two evils" argument. In the scenario that the ACC becomes unstable, I think opinion will change, but not completely.

 

I get all the reasons we are targeting certain schools, but it is too bad we aren't looking hard at schools that are a better cultural fit, like Pitt, Mizzou, Syracuse, etc. Notre Dame makes the most sense, but I'm starting to think that will never happen.

[VectorVictor]

I also have looked at ACC message boards to garner fan opinion. Agree that most of them would prefer to stay in the conference, especially NC. There are obvious reasons, from rivalries to historical/sentimental, to travel concerns. Those that want to go to the B1G mostly just cite money and stability, or an extreme dislike for the "uneducated" SEC. So I guess that would be the "lesser of two evils" argument. In the scenario that the ACC becomes unstable, I think opinion will change, but not completely.

 

I get all the reasons we are targeting certain schools, but it is too bad we aren't looking hard at schools that are a better cultural fit, like Pitt, Mizzou, Syracuse, etc. Notre Dame makes the most sense, but I'm starting to think that will never happen.

 

Your points on what the ACC folks are saying are true, but these same fans that would like to stay in the ACC realize that the the conference screwed up media rights and payout negotiations. Most of these fans that say they would *like* to stay together also acknowledge the reality of the situation -that barring some magnanimous move by ESPN to bump up payouts to the ACC, they will be forced, from a fiscal standpoint, to find better homes in the near future.

 

Better to move now and have a choice, than to be forced via collapse down the road to shack up with whatever conference will accept refugees at that point. One of the myriad of reasons why Nebraska's move to the B1G was smart.

[scarletNcream]

I would love to see NC and FSU join the BIG. FSU has just recently hinted that they would like to join the SEC, and I mean just openly talked about it, not just the closed door discussions. MR. Spetman (FSU AD) talked about what they could bring to the SEC as far as revenue and he seemed quite uncertain. The focus was TV and how they overlap with other already established markets. Thus that revenue source would be a wash. The idea is to add viewers so adding another team doesn't diminish the amount of payout to other schools. With the SEC Network looking like it will be the jugernaut that BTN is you have to bring more value. Delany has to see this. Remember ESPN has 1.5bn invested in the SEC. I posted my picks a while ago. NC, FSU, KS, GT and UVA. This would cover sports all year for the BIG and assure a playoff team in just about every sport.

[B.B. Hemingway]

Give me FSU and Mizzou.....Kansas and UNC if we go to 18 teams.

[Kiyoat Husker]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/9031167/catholic-7-leaving-big-east-june-30

 

Date now officially June 30 - Catholic 7 will be keeping Big East name and Madison Square Gardens championship- will be 10 teams (likely with Creighton) - Notre Dame will leave this summer.

 

Also this:

 

Besides coming to an agreement so Notre Dame may leave this summer, the remaining Big East membership also must determine a new name for its conference. League sources told ESPN that the America 12 Conference is the favorite to become the league's new name, but no official decision has been made. On Tuesday, Covington & Burling, the conference's law firm, purchased and registered the domain name America12.org and several other variations of America 12, according to WhoIs domain-registration data.

"We have not chosen a new conference name at this time and there are no favorites," Aresco said in a statement. "We are going through a thoughtful evaluation of potential names for our conference and will select a name in a timely manner."

 

 

on the name: meh

 

and this:

 

The Catholic 7 group, besides the Big East name and the right to hold its tournament in Madison Square Garden, also will receive about $10 million of an estimated $110 million in exit fees collected by the Big East the past few years, sources said.

Of the remaining $100 million, $15 million will go to lawyers' fees and consultants, sources said. That leaves about $85 million to be distributed between the remaining members and incoming members. How that money will be divided is still being determined with holdovers Connecticut, Cincinnati and South Florida expected to receive the biggest percentage.

 

 

holy schnikes. Interesting that they don't have a distribution plan. Sucks for the new "America 12" members

[Kiyoat Husker]

America 12 is pretty generic as to region. A lot like Conference USA. Reading between the lines:

"we expect to lose and gain teams continuously, so we thought it best not to be too specific with the name"

[Notre Dame Joe]

America 12 is pretty generic as to region. A lot like Conference USA. Reading between the lines:

"we expect to lose and gain teams continuously, so we thought it best not to be too specific with the name"

 

And when the western schools leave them for the MWC, they can change it to the Super 8.