Division 1 College Conference Realignment

[Saint Zephyr III]

Here's a question, what happens to Boise State's conference schedule? They have already announced the conference schedule for the Big East so what happens? Do they play all those games against Big East opponents or does the conference have to completely alter the schedule?

I read that as part of their agreement to rejoin the Mountain West, they're allowing Boise State to keep any and/or all non-conference opponents. They already have a series of matchups against both Utah State and BYU, who may yet return to the Mountain West with a similar type of deal.

[Geoff]

Here's a question, what happens to Boise State's conference schedule? They have already announced the conference schedule for the Big East so what happens? Do they play all those games against Big East opponents or does the conference have to completely alter the schedule?

Did you really just ask if a Mountain West team would play a Big East schedule? There are no contracts involved like in OOC games. The only reason those games were scheduled is because Boise was going to be in the Big East. Now you'll just see the MW work out a schedule that now involves Boise, and likely SDSU, staying.

[Seadragon76]

He meant conference games, Geoff.

As for the Big East: Remember what the MAC had to do when Temple left before this last season? I'm assuming the Big East will do the same.

[raysfan24]

He meant conference games, Geoff.

As for the Big East: Remember what the MAC had to do when Temple left before this last season? I'm assuming the Big East will do the same.

I did mean conference games. I kind of figured that this would be the route that they will go but I wasn't sure.

[Geoff]

Ah, miss read it. My bad.

[ESTONES6]

Is there a chance that the Big East tries to poach some MAC schools now? I love the MAC and think it would be a shame if one of the "bigger" conferences tried to nab schools from them.

At this point, if I were the Big East, I would basically try selling the Conference name to the basketball schools that just left and try to negotiate with the ACC to pick up UCONN, Cinci, and South Florida. Hopefully it would somewhat solidify the ACC incase Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State leave. The conference would be decimated if the even just 3 of those schools left, but adding a few more schools may help influence a TV deal and help keep together the ACC.

[RyanB06]

Is there a chance that the Big East tries to poach some MAC schools now? I love the MAC and think it would be a shame if one of the "bigger" conferences tried to nab schools from them.

At this point, if I were the Big East, I would basically try selling the Conference name to the basketball schools that just left and try to negotiate with the ACC to pick up UCONN, Cinci, and South Florida. Hopefully it would somewhat solidify the ACC incase Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Clemson, and Florida State leave. The conference would be decimated if the even just 3 of those schools left, but adding a few more schools may help influence a TV deal and help keep together the ACC.

I'm forced to agree: the BE would be better off booting the football schools and living as a basketball conference...kinda like it used to be.

[DaytonBlue]

The old Big East could try something like this:

Eastern Collegiate Conference:

North: UConn, Temple, UMass, Cincinnati, Memphis, Ohio U. (historically the "strongest" MAC program in FB/BB) NIU has no basketball credibility.

South: ECU, UCF, USF, Tulane, Houston, SMU

This only works if they don't lose UConn/Cincy or SMU/Houston, which is highly unlikely unless they pull off a "grant of rights" deal like the Big XII has.

[DarkJourney]

A possible 16 team Mountain West:

Coast Division

BYU

Fresno State

Hawaii

Nevada

San Diego State

San Jose State

UNLV

Utah State

Mountain Division

Air Force

Boise State

Colorado State

Houston

New Mexico

SMU

UTEP

Wyoming

[ESTONES6]

The old Big East could try something like this:

Eastern Collegiate Conference:

North: UConn, Temple, UMass, Cincinnati, Memphis, Ohio U. (historically the "strongest" MAC program in FB/BB) NIU has no basketball credibility.

South: ECU, UCF, USF, Tulane, Houston, SMU

This only works if they don't lose UConn/Cincy or SMU/Houston, which is highly unlikely unless they pull off a "grant of rights" deal like the Big XII has.

I dont think Ohio U would leave the MAC. I think they know they have a good thing there and won't leave unless its for one of the more stable conferences. With the ACC probably the next target of the B16 TEN, Big XII and SEC, its only a matter of time before Cinci, Temple, and UCONN all get invites elsewhere (probably the ACC once Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Clemson, and FSU get invites to the B16 TEN and Big XII, respectively).

[rams80]

A possible 16 team Mountain West:

Coast Division

BYU

Fresno State

Hawaii

Nevada

San Diego State

San Jose State

UNLV

Utah State

Mountain Division

Air Force

Boise State

Colorado State

Houston

New Mexico

SMU

UTEP

Wyoming

You're going to have a hard time convincing the MWC's core old guard to go to 16-the size of the WAC was why they bailed to form the MWC in the first place.

[jgiff17]

But that super conference was way before the reality of super conferences and although this could hurt the chance of the conf champion of getting into that big time bowl this is the only option for the cusa teams to get into a good conference since the future cusa looks more like an fcs conf and the only way to get some good teams together to make a bigger jump in the polls rather than beating up on the same cupcakes year after year until they were to creep up the polls years later

[rams80]

But that super conference was way before the reality of super conferences and although this could hurt the chance of the conf champion of getting into that big time bowl this is the only option for the cusa teams to get into a good conference since the future cusa looks more like an fcs conf and the only way to get some good teams together to make a bigger jump in the polls rather than beating up on the same cupcakes year after year until they were to creep up the polls years later

So the Conference USA teams get something. Good for them. What do the MWC schools, who would need to vote the Conference USA schools in, gain from this again?

[illwauk]

UTEP is a reach, but I'm having a hard time seeing why the Mountain West wouldn't want Houston and SMU. Back when the Mountain West was formed, 16-teams was a sign of a diluted, unmanageable conference. Things are obviously much different now.

[pianoknight]

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

[ESTONES6]

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

[pianoknight]

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

Obviously the league wanted competitive fairness at the forefront the last time they set up divisions. It's no surprise that they intentionally split Nebraska/Michigan from Ohio State/Penn State. Same goes for the "B-list" schools, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I'd argue that over the last several years, Wisconsin and Michigan State have elevated their play while Nebraska, Michigan and Penn State are largely in a holding pattern. Also assuming that schools #15 and #16 are east coast teams, you could split the league east and west but carve up the two Michigan schools and ensure a protected Wolverine-Sparty game every year.

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Team 15, Team 16.

West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan State

No doubt some would say that this unbalances the "Big 4" by putting Nebraska by itself (and OSU, UM, PSU together), but I'd counter that Nebraska plus Wisconsin, MSU, Iowa and Northwestern makes just as equally a strong division as putting the "Other 3" in the east division. The only way this doesn't work is if Teams 15 and 16 are like Virginia Tech and Florida State, but I doubt that.

[rams80]

Michigan State's "resurgence" had a lot to do with Jim Tressel steering some Ohio recruits to his former assistant Dantonio/not recruiting them for OSU, as well as Michigan's collapse in the late 2000s. Neither factor is in play at the moment. Sparty's going to continue to come back down to mediocrity, so if you're going to go East-West with 15 and 16, just draw the split at the Indiana/Wisconsin state borders.

[ESTONES6]

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

Obviously the league wanted competitive fairness at the forefront the last time they set up divisions. It's no surprise that they intentionally split Nebraska/Michigan from Ohio State/Penn State. Same goes for the "B-list" schools, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I'd argue that over the last several years, Wisconsin and Michigan State have elevated their play while Nebraska, Michigan and Penn State are largely in a holding pattern. Also assuming that schools #15 and #16 are east coast teams, you could split the league east and west but carve up the two Michigan schools and ensure a protected Wolverine-Sparty game every year.

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Team 15, Team 16.

West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan State

No doubt some would say that this unbalances the "Big 4" by putting Nebraska by itself (and OSU, UM, PSU together), but I'd counter that Nebraska plus Wisconsin, MSU, Iowa and Northwestern makes just as equally a strong division as putting the "Other 3" in the east division. The only way this doesn't work is if Teams 15 and 16 are like Virginia Tech and Florida State, but I doubt that.

LOL @ Michigan and Michigan State. The B16 TEN is worried about THE RIVALRY... not other rivalries. They wouldn't put Michigan and Ohio State in the same division when they could easily flip flop Michigan State and Michigan, resulting in Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions, with the protected cross over in tact.

[pianoknight]

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

Obviously the league wanted competitive fairness at the forefront the last time they set up divisions. It's no surprise that they intentionally split Nebraska/Michigan from Ohio State/Penn State. Same goes for the "B-list" schools, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I'd argue that over the last several years, Wisconsin and Michigan State have elevated their play while Nebraska, Michigan and Penn State are largely in a holding pattern. Also assuming that schools #15 and #16 are east coast teams, you could split the league east and west but carve up the two Michigan schools and ensure a protected Wolverine-Sparty game every year.

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Team 15, Team 16.

West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan State

No doubt some would say that this unbalances the "Big 4" by putting Nebraska by itself (and OSU, UM, PSU together), but I'd counter that Nebraska plus Wisconsin, MSU, Iowa and Northwestern makes just as equally a strong division as putting the "Other 3" in the east division. The only way this doesn't work is if Teams 15 and 16 are like Virginia Tech and Florida State, but I doubt that.

LOL @ Michigan and Michigan State. The B16 TEN is worried about THE RIVALRY... not other rivalries. They wouldn't put Michigan and Ohio State in the same division when they could easily flip flop Michigan State and Michigan, resulting in Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions, with the protected cross over in tact.

I actually agree with that. I feel that the "Big 4" need to be split 2-and-2, but the old timey Big Ten fans will protest. You know, the same old farts who talk about Woody & Bo and act like Penn State still isn't part of the league. Hell, Nebraska might as well be on Mars to those guys.