dfwabel

Division 1 College Conference Realignment

Recommended Posts

While I can't cite a rule, I'm almost certain the Big Ten does not allow teams to compete in other conferences if they support that sport already. Hockey is a sport the Big Ten does not organize, so schools that have it are free to compete in other conferences. I don't think that would apply to baseball or anything like that.

That doesn't mean things couldn't change, though, but I think that'd be a situation the conference would like to avoid. Even if it's the truth (as in baseball), I think it cheapens the image of the conference, and I don't think that's something the Big Ten would be keen on doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that as long as football and basketball are comprised of the same members, it doesn't really cheapen it that much, since the average (read - me) fan doesn't know anything about any other sport anyway. The Big East does seem like kind of a cheap, patchwork organization sometimes since they roll out different teams in every sport*.

*yes, I know this is because of the 1-aa football teams that can't participate in that sport, but still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that as long as football and basketball are comprised of the same members, it doesn't really cheapen it that much, since the average (read - me) fan doesn't know anything about any other sport anyway. The Big East does seem like kind of a cheap, patchwork organization sometimes since they roll out different teams in every sport*.

*yes, I know this is because of the 1-aa football teams that can't participate in that sport, but still.

You're right that it doesn't make a difference to the casual fan (or even some hardcore fans). But it does weaken the Big East's political power within the NCAA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from Saturday. There is a uniform comment form his at the end as well.

Seattle Times: AD Believes both Big Ten/Pac 10 Have Talked to Texas and aTm

WOODWARD TALKS --- Just finished a pre-game interview with athletic director Scott Woodward and we addressed a variety of issues.

He said hosting ESPN's College GameDay show doesn't make the school any more money than a normal game. In fact, the expenses are a little higher.

Said Woodward: "Is it a budget buster? No. For the exposure you get, it is a great bargain."

He said the ESPN producers have enjoyed their time so much that "they were to the point of scouting for GameDay for football."

Woodward also talked about expansion and said the Pac-10 and the Big Ten have reached out to officials at Texas and Texas A&M. "I'd be surprised if our office is not in contact with them," he said. "I'm sure those conversations have happened and are taking place."

When asked if the league might expand beyond two teams, Woodward said that's a possibility. "It could be two, four or a merger of Big 12. ... There's a theory that at the end of the day there's only going to be four super conferences. Now that it's going to look like, God only knows."

Woodward said football coach Steve Sarkisian is entertaining the idea of wearing an alternative black jersey, but quickly added that nothing is in the works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a theory that at the end of the day there's only going to be four super conferences. Now that it's going to look like, God only knows."

Woodward said football coach Steve Sarkisian is entertaining the idea of wearing an alternative black jersey, but quickly added that nothing is in the works.

Let's hope not on both counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I wanna know is, why the hell doesn't the NCAA step in and limit the sizes of these conferences? It's bad enough that they caused them to cannibalize each other by making that idiotic "12 teams for a football championship" rule.

8-10 is the ideal size for a conference. There's no reason any of them need more than 12 teams, and even that should be reserved for conferences that cover areas with low population density (such as the Mountain West).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I wanna know is, why the hell doesn't the NCAA step in and limit the sizes of these conferences? It's bad enough that they caused them to cannibalize each other by making that idiotic "12 teams for a football championship" rule.

8-10 is the ideal size for a conference. There's no reason any of them need more than 12 teams, and even that should be reserved for conferences that cover areas with low population density (such as the Mountain West).

Why should/could the NCAA, an organization made up of the member schools, dictate what or which schools do/can to organize? They (NCAA) already lost a case taken to the Supreme Court with the CFA in 1984 concerned with who controls college football telecasts. Why get beaten down again, 30 years later when the damages would be enough for those schools who file class action to split? They got busted for trying to limit "trade" in terms of the number of games aired and the money which schools receive, so why now try to restrain organization?

If they "limit" the size of conferences, then they may violate the Sherman Act, again.

For those who want to read the SCOUTS decision in 1984, look here:

NCAA vs. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is from Saturday. There is a uniform comment form his at the end as well.

Seattle Times: AD Believes both Big Ten/Pac 10 Have Talked to Texas and aTm

WOODWARD TALKS --- Just finished a pre-game interview with athletic director Scott Woodward and we addressed a variety of issues.

He said hosting ESPN's College GameDay show doesn't make the school any more money than a normal game. In fact, the expenses are a little higher.

Said Woodward: "Is it a budget buster? No. For the exposure you get, it is a great bargain."

He said the ESPN producers have enjoyed their time so much that "they were to the point of scouting for GameDay for football."

Woodward also talked about expansion and said the Pac-10 and the Big Ten have reached out to officials at Texas and Texas A&M. "I'd be surprised if our office is not in contact with them," he said. "I'm sure those conversations have happened and are taking place."

When asked if the league might expand beyond two teams, Woodward said that's a possibility. "It could be two, four or a merger of Big 12. ... There's a theory that at the end of the day there's only going to be four super conferences. Now that it's going to look like, God only knows."

Woodward said football coach Steve Sarkisian is entertaining the idea of wearing an alternative black jersey, but quickly added that nothing is in the works.

Oh :censored:, hell no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I wanna know is, why the hell doesn't the NCAA step in and limit the sizes of these conferences? It's bad enough that they caused them to cannibalize each other by making that idiotic "12 teams for a football championship" rule.

8-10 is the ideal size for a conference. There's no reason any of them need more than 12 teams, and even that should be reserved for conferences that cover areas with low population density (such as the Mountain West).

Why should/could the NCAA, an organization made up of the member schools, dictate what or which schools do/can to organize? They (NCAA) already lost a case taken to the Supreme Court with the CFA in 1984 concerned with who controls college football telecasts. Why get beaten down again, 30 years later when the damages would be enough for those schools who file class action to split? They got busted for trying to limit "trade" in terms of the number of games aired and the money which schools receive, so why now try to restrain organization?

If they "limit" the size of conferences, then they may violate the Sherman Act, again.

For those who want to read the SCOUTS decision in 1984, look here:

NCAA vs. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

I'm no attorney, but I'm pretty sure an argument can be made that the practices of these power conferences (and... apparently... soon to be "super-conferences) being monopolistic and non-competitive. The mid-majors were able to sue their way into the BCS on those grounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 120 Division FBS schools. Eliminate independent programs and organize these schools into 10 conferences of 12 teams each. Divide each conference into a pair of 6-team divisions. Within its conference, a team plays all 5 divisional foes each year and 3 of the 6 schools in the other division on a rotational basis, making for an 8-game conference schedule. Additionally, each school can schedule 3 non-conference games, bringing regular-season play to 11 games. (In the event that a school wishes to play a non-divisional traditional rival from within its conference, said game can be scheduled as one of the non-conference games, but won't be counted in conference standings.) Division winners in each conference face-off in a conference championship game. After the conference championship games, a 16-team playoff field is put together, comprised of the 10 conference champions and 6 at-large schools. Selection of the at-large schools and playoff seeding is determined by a committee using a combination of a coach's poll, a media poll, the Harris Interactive poll and computer rankings. Playoffs are single-elimination, with teams seeded 1 vs 16, 9 vs 8, 5 vs 12, 13 vs 4 in one half of the bracket, and 3 v 14, 11 v 6, 7 v 10 and 15 v 2 in the other half of the bracket. First-round and quarter-final games are played at the home stadium of the higher-ranked team. The semi-final and championship game sites are put out to competitive bid. The most games a championship team would have to play would be 16 - one more than the FCS champion currently has to play. Bowls could still exist and those teams not qualifying/selected for the 16-team playoff would be free to accept bowl bids. The title of "National Champion" would be determined on the field of play and awarded to the winner of the 16-team playoff tournament.

Finis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 120 Division FBS schools. Eliminate independent programs and organize these schools into 10 conferences of 12 teams each. Divide each conference into a pair of 6-team divisions. Within its conference, a team plays all 5 divisional foes each year and 3 of the 6 schools in the other division on a rotational basis, making for an 8-game conference schedule. Additionally, each school can schedule 3 non-conference games, bringing regular-season play to 11 games. (In the event that a school wishes to play a non-divisional traditional rival from within its conference, said game can be scheduled as one of the non-conference games, but won't be counted in conference standings.) Division winners in each conference face-off in a conference championship game. After the conference championship games, a 16-team playoff field is put together, comprised of the 10 conference champions and 6 at-large schools. Selection of the at-large schools and playoff seeding is determined by a committee using a combination of a coach's poll, a media poll, the Harris Interactive poll and computer rankings. Playoffs are single-elimination, with teams seeded 1 vs 16, 9 vs 8, 5 vs 12, 13 vs 4 in one half of the bracket, and 3 v 14, 11 v 6, 7 v 10 and 15 v 2 in the other half of the bracket. First-round and quarter-final games are played at the home stadium of the higher-ranked team. The semi-final and championship game sites are put out to competitive bid. The most games a championship team would have to play would be 16 - one more than the FCS champion currently has to play. Bowls could still exist and those teams not qualifying/selected for the 16-team playoff would be free to accept bowl bids. The title of "National Champion" would be determined on the field of play and awarded to the winner of the 16-team playoff tournament.

Finis

That my friend makes too much sense, thus it probably will never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the Big Ten expansion. (SFW)

Apparently they recently tried to lure Texas to the conference. Not only would that render the Big XII almost completely irrelevant, it makes no geographic sense and would offend Texas fans more than Big Ten fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thoughts on the Big Ten expansion. (SFW)

Apparently they recently tried to lure Texas to the conference. Not only would that render the Big XII almost completely irrelevant, it makes no geographic sense and would offend Texas fans more than Big Ten fans.

Isn't that...kind of the point? I mean, shooting your biggest rival for Midwest attention in the face less than 20 years in would be a welcome goal, right?

Geography is less meaningful when you talk about the money and prestige factor.

I also don't the Texas is as married to the Big XII as an institution so much as it is the revenue sharing system it has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will bump since since there was reported news last week from the Pac 10.

Mercury-News Blog on Pac 10 Expansion

From the story:

I?ve spent a bit of time the past few weeks talking to folks inside and outside the league about expansion, which became a sizzling topic when commissioner Larry Scott said he was looking at it ?very seriously". That said, here?s what I?ve learned:

* To say that the soul of the Pac-10 is at stake would be an overstatement ? but not by much.

The presidents are aware of the huge difference in revenue between the Pac-10 and Big Ten/SEC (more below) and have dollar signs in their eyes. ?Everything is for sale,? one source told me. ?They?ll do anything necessary to make money.?

This doesn?t guarantee that everything will be for sale when/if the presidents ultimately sit down (as a group) to vote on expansion.

* Procedural issues require six votes and constitutional issues need eight. But I?ve been told that all 10 schools must sign off on expansion, which means that one president could put the kibosh on the whole thing.

* Here are the specifics on the dollars, which are the key to everything.

The Pac-10 currently generates about $100 million in annual revenue while the Big Ten and SEC are both over $200 million.

The number I keep hearing out of Pac-10 circles is $150-$175 million ? the presidents want another $5 ? $7.5 million per school. They understand that the conference might not equal the Big Ten, but they want a 50 percent increase ? if not more.

So in regards to expansion, the central question becomes: Would adding two teams create so much more net revenue that the 1/12th splits are greater than the 1/10th splits?

* One way to increase inventory, of course, is by adding schools. But which ones?

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada and Boise State are not part of the equation, multiple sources told me. No way, no how. They don?t work academically and they don?t work in the TV homes/revenue equation.

Unless Missouri or Texas (presumably with Texas A&M) are available ? and at this point there?s no substantive reason to believe they are ? then only three options exist for the conference: Utah, BYU and Colorado.

And for all practical purposes, there are only two options: Colorado and BYU, or Colorado and Utah.

Utah and BYU together simply will not work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* One way to increase inventory, of course, is by adding schools. But which ones?

San Diego State, Fresno State, UNLV, Nevada and Boise State are not part of the equation, multiple sources told me. No way, no how. They don’t work academically and they don’t work in the TV homes/revenue equation.

Unless Missouri or Texas (presumably with Texas A&M) are available — and at this point there’s no substantive reason to believe they are — then only three options exist for the conference: Utah, BYU and Colorado.

And for all practical purposes, there are only two options: Colorado and BYU, or Colorado and Utah.

Utah and BYU together simply will not work.

The schools that the Pac-10 would most like to get are BYU and Colorado.

Colorado would bring the Denver Metro Area population with it, as well as Denver's #16 primary television market. BYU and Utah are a wash as far as population base and television market go, as both would be playing to the Salt Lake City Metro Area and the #31 television market. That said, BYU is considered to be a significantly better school than Utah academically. U.S. News & World Report pegged BYU #77 in its annual ranking of universities, with Utah checking-in at #126. Incidentally, USN&WR has Colorado ranked #77 on its list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 120 Division FBS schools. Eliminate independent programs and organize these schools into 10 conferences of 12 teams each. Divide each conference into a pair of 6-team divisions. Within its conference, a team plays all 5 divisional foes each year and 3 of the 6 schools in the other division on a rotational basis, making for an 8-game conference schedule. Additionally, each school can schedule 3 non-conference games, bringing regular-season play to 11 games. (In the event that a school wishes to play a non-divisional traditional rival from within its conference, said game can be scheduled as one of the non-conference games, but won't be counted in conference standings.) Division winners in each conference face-off in a conference championship game. After the conference championship games, a 16-team playoff field is put together, comprised of the 10 conference champions and 6 at-large schools. Selection of the at-large schools and playoff seeding is determined by a committee using a combination of a coach's poll, a media poll, the Harris Interactive poll and computer rankings. Playoffs are single-elimination, with teams seeded 1 vs 16, 9 vs 8, 5 vs 12, 13 vs 4 in one half of the bracket, and 3 v 14, 11 v 6, 7 v 10 and 15 v 2 in the other half of the bracket. First-round and quarter-final games are played at the home stadium of the higher-ranked team. The semi-final and championship game sites are put out to competitive bid. The most games a championship team would have to play would be 16 - one more than the FCS champion currently has to play. Bowls could still exist and those teams not qualifying/selected for the 16-team playoff would be free to accept bowl bids. The title of "National Champion" would be determined on the field of play and awarded to the winner of the 16-team playoff tournament.

Finis

Or just be an NFL fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bumping this...it looks like Big Ten expansion is coming, and it's coming sooner than previously anticipated. From the Chicago Tribune:

Remember the talk that the Big Ten would take 12 to 18 months to decide whether to expand?

An accelerated timetable has emerged, according to sources familiar with the process.

High-ranking Big Ten representatives will meet Sunday in Washington to discuss expansion. The timing and location of the session make sense considering the Association of American Universities has its semi-annual meetings there through Tuesday and all 11 Big Ten schools are AAU members.

Among those attending will be Northwestern President Morton Schapiro, according to a university spokesman, and Illinois' interim chancellor, Robert Easter.

If the conference can emerge from the meetings with a mandate to expand, Commissioner Jim Delany could take a substantial step next week at the annual Bowl Championship Series meetings outside Phoenix.

It looks like the writing's on the wall for the Big East as a major conference - or possibly even a football conference. If they lose three schools to the Big 14, it would seem to follow that the other football schools might also look to jump to stronger conferences lest they be relegated to mid-major status.

If Syracuse is indeed one of the teams that receives and accepts an offer to join, I'd be tremendously disappointed to see the end of Big East basketball at the expense of football, and I'd likely have fewer opportunities to see my school play in my part of the country. But I'd be incredulous if my school passed up the money that would come with a move to the Big 14, and stayed in a conference that has shown no interest, ambition, or aggression in proactively adapting to the economic realities of college athletics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Syracuse gets an offer to the Big Ten, they have to take it. There's no way the Big East is surviving this at all because I think the writing's on the wall that Syracuse and Pitt would be going at the very least. It'll suck for hoops, but at least there's still the non-conference route for keeping rivalries like Georgetown alive. Plus with that much money on the table (especially considering Syracuse has seen a drop in endowments due to the economic downturn), and the fate of the Big East on the ropes, there's really no option left unless they get picked up by the ACC after this raid.

Also, although it will suck from the hoops standpoint, football benefits with more possible bowl games (yes I know the Orange are a year or two away from even considering that), plus there'd be no real loss for lacrosse considering our biggest rivals are an independent, an ACC school, and 2 Ivy League schools, not to mention the Orange were and independent until this year (though the BE lax conference will be severely weakened). Sports like field hockey and women's lacrosse would benefit too I think but time will tell with the non-revenues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Syracuse gets an offer to the Big Ten, they have to take it. There's no way the Big East is surviving this at all because I think the writing's on the wall that Syracuse and Pitt would be going at the very least. It'll suck for hoops, but at least there's still the non-conference route for keeping rivalries like Georgetown alive. Plus with that much money on the table (especially considering Syracuse has seen a drop in endowments due to the economic downturn), and the fate of the Big East on the ropes, there's really no option left unless they get picked up by the ACC after this raid.

Also, although it will suck from the hoops standpoint, football benefits with more possible bowl games (yes I know the Orange are a year or two away from even considering that), plus there'd be no real loss for lacrosse considering our biggest rivals are an independent, an ACC school, and 2 Ivy League schools, not to mention the Orange were and independent until this year (though the BE lax conference will be severely weakened). Sports like field hockey and women's lacrosse would benefit too I think but time will tell with the non-revenues

Non-revenues will benefit since the school will take part in revenue sharing from network and cable TV contracts as well as from the BTN. They would get additional exposure in recruiting as well from being on BTN.

Since most universities have fiscal years beginning on June 1, we should know more by then. When you have Mizzou's Gary Pinkel publicly criticizing the fact that the Big XII does not equally share revenues yesterday and Missouri's governor already gave them the OK to consider a Big Ten invitation, then we can see who is ready to move if asked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.