With the SEC having a hard time getting schools on board with the blatant logic of a 9-game conference schedule, I don't want to think of the idiocy of trying to fit 16 teams equitably in an 8-game schedule. It can't happen. Heck, it just about calls for a 10-game conference schedule which would be murderous.
The SEC is standing pat not doubling down. Any further movement will be between the ACC, Big East, and Big 12 with the Pac-12 probably liking the idea of expansion but lacking the reasonable suitors.
I agree, however, its pretty obvious the Big Ten is way out front of us as it relates to its network. I dont see how the SEC can wait much longer to roll out its own branded network. It probably also forces the SEC to move to a 9 game conference schedule (which would be pretty good for a 16 team league setup in 4 divisions). Everyone says that conferences will go to 16, which is probably right, but who does the Big Ten get to get to 16 that helps its brand and increases revenue? Who does the SEC get to get to 16 that helps its brand and increases its revenue? On the East Coast, there arent 4 good teams that meet this criteria unless you highjack the core of the ACC which will be virtually impossible to do because they want to protect their basketball dominance as a conference. To the West who do you get?
Its pretty obvious the Big Ten is merely just planting stakes at this point. They know that Rutgers and Maryland are not going to contribute to the overall wealth of the conference - they just happen to be in high population markets that gives the Big Ten a greater entry point into those markets. If the Big Ten does go to 16, I might expect them to poach Boston College or UCONN next. But I will say that all bets are off for the ACC now because I think Maryland was a charter member and a solid contributor in basketball that is peeling off. That move alone could put VA Tech and UVA in play - neither of which are really competitive in basketball within their own conference. If you dont have much pedigree in basketball there is really no reason to stay in a conference built on basketball which is what FSU is finding out.
Personally, I think the SEC would be better off continuing to build its brand off what makes it great - football. In doing so, I think if you cant get entry point with NCSU, VaTech, or UVA then I think you need to increase your hold in TX minus UT.
Notre Dame really made a mistake lining up with the ACC, imo. Their reputation is based on football - they lined up with a basketball driven conference. If Notre Dame isnt careful they are going to wind up like the Harlem Globetrotters, a traveling sideshow, based on who their scheduling partners will likely continue to be in the future.
What I dont understand is why the PTBs havent woken up and determined that it makes more since to have conference affiliation along the sport lines rather than among institutions as a whole. This way each school could develop conference agreements, revenue sharing agreements (if any) based on their competitiveness in a particular sport. In this way athletic programs could save travel costs and maximize the revenue for its athletic department. Doing so would likely increase funding in the Olympic and Title IX sports. Under the current structure, its foolish for West Virginia to send its lacrosse team to play Texas - the lacrosse teams need to play in a local conference. And Notre Dame, maybe positioning itself to do just this by affiliating with the ACC for all sports except football.
Last edited by JDCrimson; November 19th, 2012 at 01:04 PM.
Furthermore, with a 9th conference game there's a decent chance Alabama doesn't schedule a team like Michigan, so they can't flex their OOC muscles and garner more support. If the SEC does nothing but beat up on each other, sooner or later people will just dismiss them, they need schedule flexibility.
Last edited by KrAzY3; November 19th, 2012 at 01:11 PM.
If the SEC (along with the Big 10, the Big 12, and the Pac 12) ever expand to 16 teams, my understanding is that each conference would set up a tournament at the end of the year. You could have a play-off with the division winners, and maybe a few wildcard teams. Then each of the four conferences would send a team to the national semi-finals and finals. The idea would be to take complete control of the process (and the money). Any team not among the 64 elite teams would be shut out of the process.
If that arrangement ever came to pass, you could have as many conference games as you liked, as no conference would be penalized for having a great team with 2 or 3 losses. You could also schedule tough nonconference games, just like in basketball.
I'd be happy if the NCAA would form a division between FBS anf FCS and kick the MAC, C-USA, etc, into there and let the big boys compete a for a real, honest to goodness NCAA Division I football championship.
Although the particular teams worry me, I'd be in favor of a set of four 16-team conferences for the top tier for football. Put another layer in between it and the FCS for the UAB's, Troy's, MTSU's, and Arkansas States of the world. Get it completely out from under the NCAA (and yes, that is possible). There would be plenty of money to create its own infrastructure.
I wonder what the next move for the Big East will be. They lose Pitt and Syracuse to the ACC next year but are gaining Central Florida, Houston, SMU, Temple and Memphis as full members next year. Boise State and San Diego State join for football only next year and Navy joins for football in 2015.
So that gives them 12 football teams next year and have announced plans for a championship game. But they are losing Rutgers in 2014 to the Big Ten and Connecticut seems headed to the ACC. That will knock them down to ten members, with Navy making eleven. I doubt they'd want to have a championship game for one year and then drop it. Is there anything left in the bottom of the barrell of C-USA or the Sun Belt for them to scrape?
Last edited by RammerJammer14; November 19th, 2012 at 03:33 PM.
-Why's it us Sergeant? Why us?
-Because we're here lad. Nobody else. Just us.
-"I wish the ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened."
-"So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us."
Also, as to your example. It only matters if Alabama loses. I'm worried about championships, and Alabama won't win too many of those if they finish because Auburn. What I do know, is that for every year that Alabama draws the short straw, there will also be a year that Alabama gets the easy path. If you add a ninth game, given the level of the SEC, you make every single year harder. I don't see that as a solution to anything.
Last edited by KrAzY3; November 19th, 2012 at 04:05 PM.