Division 1 College Conference Realignment

[jgiff17]

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado...but I am certain that the PAC 12 will expand they just probably noticed that Texas okla are a tad bit outta the way and the costs to travel would take away from the large amount of money being made. They will expand once the big 12 is solidified again so they won't have to choose between Boise state and Texas. They will add and should add byu and Boise state. I think thats where it should stop. Those two teams are logistically ok and will only bring the PAC ## to SEC level once the depth of talent catches up to the rest of the PAC schools

[jgiff17]

The big 12 has to go after notre dame hard and I'm not against adding smu as the 12th school. This will allow ok state to head to the north division and have some real tough competition in both division much less the conference championship. With the addition of tcu the league should stay at 10 until they can add at least another bcs team to compete with the front runners every year.

[rams80]

Why not Houston to the SEC along with Louisville and west Virginia one the big east collapses? Houston evens out the west and gives a&m, lsu close comp and they are about to finalize plans on a brand new stadium (and renovation of arena) and will more than likely play in reliant for a couple of years until it's completed. West Virginia and Louisville not only bring in good comp in football, they raise the bar even higher in basketball. Louisville and Kentucky are rivals. Houston area has some of the best high school recruits in the country. Thoughts anyone?

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado...but I am certain that the PAC 12 will expand they just probably noticed that Texas okla are a tad bit outta the way and the costs to travel would take away from the large amount of money being made. They will expand once the big 12 is solidified again so they won't have to choose between Boise state and Texas. They will add and should add byu and Boise state. I think thats where it should stop. Those two teams are logistically ok and will only bring the PAC ## to SEC level once the depth of talent catches up to the rest of the PAC schools

The big 12 has to go after notre dame hard and I'm not against adding smu as the 12th school. This will allow ok state to head to the north division and have some real tough competition in both division much less the conference championship. With the addition of tcu the league should stay at 10 until they can add at least another bcs team to compete with the front runners every year.

No.

[jgiff17]

Hahaha well reality has been much more drastic and unsuspecting than that won't you agree?

[ESTONES6]

Conferences do NOT want to add second and third tier schools in states where they already have a presence. That's why Louisville isn't going to be invited to the SEC because its not a top tier school like say Florida State, even Clemson to a lesser extent. These conferences want to add States, they want to add footprints.

The Big XII is a different story because they are trying to recruit schools at a rapid pace since they have lost 2 schools already and will probably be losing a third in the not too distant future. Yes, they still have Oklahoma and Texas, which is enough for any conference to at least be relevant. But they need to aggressively expand.

As for Maryland... get real. Playing Duke twice per year in basketball is a small sacrifice when you can play Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Purdue, Michigan State, Nebraska and Wisconsin in football.

I think the most fascinating part about realignment is going to come from the non-premier schools that change conferences. Nebraska to the Big 10 and Texas A&M to the SEC were perfect fits at the perfect time. They were big football programs, with large national followings, that fit in competitively and geographically just about perfectly. My interest gets increased from schools like Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia Tech, Virginia, Kansas, Kansas State... where schools like those end up, and then the impact the new conferences have on those school. Does enrollment go up? Does the football and basketball playing field become more level? Does recruiting increase?

[Chicageaux]

Why not Houston to the SEC along with Louisville and west Virginia one the big east collapses? Houston evens out the west and gives a&m, lsu close comp and they are about to finalize plans on a brand new stadium (and renovation of arena) and will more than likely play in reliant for a couple of years until it's completed. West Virginia and Louisville not only bring in good comp in football, they raise the bar even higher in basketball. Louisville and Kentucky are rivals. Houston area has some of the best high school recruits in the country. Thoughts anyone?

Missouri also evens out the west and gives everyone else in the west close competition. Besides, by adding A&M, they have the Houston area market, they really don't need to add Houston. And why would they? I honestly see no scenario where the SEC extends an invitation to Houston. The SEC has already stamped DENIED on West Virginia's application, they don't want them. They'd be much better going after Virginia Tech IF they extend along the east coast.

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado...but I am certain that the PAC 12 will expand they just probably noticed that Texas okla are a tad bit outta the way and the costs to travel would take away from the large amount of money being made. They will expand once the big 12 is solidified again so they won't have to choose between Boise state and Texas. They will add and should add byu and Boise state. I think thats where it should stop. Those two teams are logistically ok and will only bring the PAC ## to SEC level once the depth of talent catches up to the rest of the PAC schools

Their reasoning for not adding Texas/Oklahoma wasn't because of the fact the schools were out of the way, it was because Texas wouldn't budge on the TLN. As was stated in this thread before, besides for football, Boise State brings nothing else to the table. They're not good athletically or academically. As far as BYU, I think they should add them, but I don't think they will considering they already stated they won't.

The big 12 has to go after notre dame hard and I'm not against adding smu as the 12th school. This will allow ok state to head to the north division and have some real tough competition in both division much less the conference championship. With the addition of tcu the league should stay at 10 until they can add at least another bcs team to compete with the front runners every year.

I'm sure the Big XII would love to go after Notre Dame, however I don't believe Notre Dame would go to the Big XII. Notre Dame has a pretty good deal right now and I don't believe throwing them in a conference with Texas would be beneficial to anyone.

[Chawls]

As this board's resident Tulane fan, I'm excited about the rumors of Tulane being invited to the Big East or even the Big XII. Either conference is better than the irrelevant C-USA and IIRC, both potential conferences have guaranteed bowl berths. Hopefully this will help my Green Wave with recruiting and bring us back to prominence!

On a somewhat unrelated note, hearing that Tulane was originally in the running for Tyrann Mathieu, ugh, shot to the gut.

[illwauk]

The SEC has already stamped DENIED on West Virginia's application, they don't want them.

This is a mistake, IMO... West Virginia fits in perfectly with the SEC both culturally and geographically.

Anyway, I'm glad to see TCU going to the Big XII even if the invite comes about 16 years overdue. I'm all for them adding BYU and Boise to bring them back to 12.

[Geoff]

As this board's resident Tulane fan, I'm excited about the rumors of Tulane being invited to the Big East or even the Big XII. Either conference is better than the irrelevant C-USA and IIRC, both potential conferences have guaranteed bowl berths. Hopefully this will help my Green Wave with recruiting and bring us back to prominence!

On a somewhat unrelated note, hearing that Tulane was originally in the running for Tyrann Mathieu, ugh, shot to the gut.

*raises hand* Um, yeah, C-USA has guaranteed bowl tie-ins too. This argument makes no sense unless you meant both conferences are BCS AQ leagues. And if that's what you meant, there's no guarantee the new Big East (aka C-USA+) would retain it's AQ status.

[dfwabel]

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado

Their biggest issues are a small stadium so less $$$ for the gate and that I am pretty sure that Stanford, Berkeley, USC, and UCLA do not want to be in the same conference with an institution whose six year undergraduate graduation rate (for all students) is just 26%!

[DarkJourney]

Big XII

North

Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

South

Baylor, Houston, SMU, TCU, Texas, Texas Tech

-Texas and Oklahoma can dominate their divisions for years to come and meet in the Big XII championship pretty much every year.

-If Missouri leaves then go with BYU in the North

[ESTONES6]

Do you really see Houston and SMU getting an invite to the Big XII?

[McCall]

Do you really see Houston and SMU getting an invite to the Big XII?

If it weren't for the Big East schools getting them first, then I could see Houston. SMU is more of a last resort, 12th member, maybe higher if they're trying to be a 14-16 member conference.

[yh]

The SEC has already stamped DENIED on West Virginia's application, they don't want them.

This is a mistake, IMO... West Virginia fits in perfectly with the SEC both culturally and geographically.

One rejection doesn't permanently seal WVU's fate. It just means that at the time they applied there was insufficient interest on the part of the SEC. Nine of twelve schools must approve an application into the SEC. If eight schools had interest but four held off because they wanted to pursue the Mizzou angle, then things could change quickly if (and now I'm starting to believe when) Mizzou chooses to stay put in a purportedly stabilized Big XII.

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado

Their biggest issues are a small stadium so less $$$ for the gate and that I am pretty sure that Stanford, Berkeley, USC, and UCLA do not want to be in the same conference with an institution whose six year undergraduate graduation rate (for all students) is just 26%!

Moreover, I believe the biggest knock on BSU continues to be their relatively limited offering of athletics. They don't compete in a number of the "non-revenue" sports that happen to be popular on the other Pac 12 campuses. If I'm not mistaken, I believe that BSU would need to add some programs on the men's side which would then trigger Title IX obligations to increase the number of sports available to the ladies. Naturally, the only way an expansion of the athletic department could be financed is through significant increases to football ticket prices, and if the Broncos are going to find themselves in a significantly more challenging football conference, the question begs whether fans will want to pay a lot more to see a team whose chances to contend for a BCS bid may fall by the wayside in early October rather than the second to last weekend in November.

[dfwabel]

The SEC has already stamped DENIED on West Virginia's application, they don't want them.

This is a mistake, IMO... West Virginia fits in perfectly with the SEC both culturally and geographically.

One rejection doesn't permanently seal WVU's fate. It just means that at the time they applied there was insufficient interest on the part of the SEC. Nine of twelve schools must approve an application into the SEC. If eight schools had interest but four held off because they wanted to pursue the Mizzou angle, then things could change quickly if (and now I'm starting to believe when) Mizzou chooses to stay put in a purportedly stabilized Big XII.

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado

Their biggest issues are a small stadium so less $$ for the gate and that I am pretty sure that Stanford, Berkeley, USC, and UCLA do not want to be in the same conference with an institution whose six year undergraduate graduation rate (for all students) is just 26%!

Moreover, I believe the biggest knock on BSU continues to be their relatively limited offering of athletics. They don't compete in a number of the "non-revenue" sports that happen to be popular on the other Pac 12 campuses. If I'm not mistaken, I believe that BSU would need to add some programs on the men's side which would then trigger Title IX obligations to increase the number of sports available to the ladies. Naturally, the only way an expansion of the athletic department could be financed is through significant increases to football ticket prices, and if the Broncos are going to find themselves in a significantly more challenging football conference, the question begs whether fans will want to pay a lot more to see a team whose chances to contend for a BCS bid may fall by the wayside in early October rather than the second to last weekend in November.

However, Cincinnati has been rumored even more than Boise State, yet they offer only nine Women's sports; one less than Boise St. themselves

[jgiff17]

Boise state should have gotten in the PAC 12 rather than Colorado

Their biggest issues are a small stadium so less $$$ for the gate and that I am pretty sure that Stanford, Berkeley, USC, and UCLA do not want to be in the same conference with an institution whose six year undergraduate graduation rate (for all students) is just 26%!

Now you want to throw out some academics?! Haha that's pretty friggin horrible but has any of these moves really considered academics or any other sports within the schools?! The NCAA might need to step in and just have 8 regionally based 10 teams divisions that each division winner gets into an 8 team playoff. Is this too horrible to do?! Only now does the traditions and history of the conferences seems to not matter as much anymore so why not?!

[yh]

Do you really see Houston and SMU getting an invite to the Big XII?

If it weren't for the Big East schools getting them first, then I could see Houston. SMU is more of a last resort, 12th member, maybe higher if they're trying to be a 14-16 member conference.

I think the Big XII is done with Texas. Uncle DeLoss has made his concession and there shall be no more division of the Lone Star pie.

If Mizzou stays (and, as I said above, I think that may happen now), I think the next two schools in are Louisville and . . . . . . wait for it . . . . . Tulane.

Two lines of thinking here: First, if the SEC is going to stick its toe into Texas then I think the Big XII is going to want to stick its toe into SEC territory (not to suggest that suggest that Tulane and LSU are peers). It helps make the argument to TV partners that there's a reason to up the ante on a broadcast contract. And, I suppose, there's the possibility that the right climate might even allow for a network to come up with Big XII/SEC doubleheaders and whatnot. But that's only one argument, and likely the only one that will be discussed openly.

The second line of thinking is that extending the Big XII's reach into the deeper South will seriously cripple the Sun Belt, CUSA and even the WAC. By giving kids in Louisiana (and I'd argue Mississippi, Kentucky and Tennessee) more options to attend a school in a BCS conference, it weakens the recruiting base for the LA directional schools, Southern Miss, Memphis, MTSU, etc. It also hurts Tulsa because there's some more southern schools that might be aligned in a division with the OK schools or set up in a schedule where they'll play at least one OK school every year. Draining the Sun Belt, CUSA and WAC of what few decent prospects their better schools currently get will certainly make the argument for a "Super 64" arrangement stronger and may wind up producing yet another "I-AA" situation where the lesser competitive schools play for their own prizes, quite likely with a handful of the better FCS squads moving into this tier. It may also provide an opportunity for some of the fourth tier bowls to get some new life if they have "National Championship" implications in this new mezzanine tier. Maybe I'm way off base here, but if I'm thinking it I can guarantee you there are people in the conferences thinking it too. We're headed for a Super 64 and the only issue is how that gets pulled off with the schools not making the cut throwing too big of a tantrum because they were invited into the back room to hang out with Jugdish, Mohammet, Sidney and Clayton.

[jgiff17]

Houston gives sec a staple in the state of Texas much less the best recruiting hot bed. A&M doesn't give you Houston, it gives you college station, SA, etc. Houston gives you old SWC rivalries, close travel, sticks with the whole SOUTH portion of the conference title, a top metropolis that is always hungry for good football. With the addition of tcu to the big XII it just neutralizes the A&M move. Time will tell but if Houston can promise a new stadium and renovated Basketball arena then it should be considered given not only success in football in SWC era and present, but baseball as well and basketball history.

[dfwabel]

Houston gives sec a staple in the state of Texas much less the best recruiting hot bed. A&M doesn't give you Houston, it gives you college station, SA, etc. Houston gives you old SWC rivalries, close travel, sticks with the whole SOUTH portion of the conference title, a top metropolis that is always hungry for good football. With the addition of tcu to the big XII it just neutralizes the A&M move. Time will tell but if Houston can promise a new stadium and renovated Basketball arena then it should be considered given not only success in football in SWC era and present, but baseball as well and basketball history.

College Station is just 90 minutes from Houston, the same virtual driving distance from Gainesville to Tampa, but you would not say that the SEC only gets Gainesville, would you?. Plus Houston is has the largest chapter for TAMU Former Students (alumni) in the state.

[yh]

Houston gives sec a staple in the state of Texas much less the best recruiting hot bed. A&M doesn't give you Houston, it gives you college station, SA, etc. Houston gives you old SWC rivalries, close travel, sticks with the whole SOUTH portion of the conference title, a top metropolis that is always hungry for good football. With the addition of tcu to the big XII it just neutralizes the A&M move. Time will tell but if Houston can promise a new stadium and renovated Basketball arena then it should be considered given not only success in football in SWC era and present, but baseball as well and basketball history.

You make good arguments from the logistical and competitive perspectives. However you disregard the most important perspective - the political one. I was stunned to see UT acquiesce on bringing another Texas school into the fold. I just can't imagine there being further acquiescence to bringing in another one under just about any circumstance. But, if this whole merry-go-round has taught me one thing, it's don't blink because strange stuff happens.